Lagat v Springboard Capital Limited (Cause E579 of 2023) [2024] KEELRC 2005 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Nairobi court upheld a manager's dismissal because he admitted work wasn't done properly and his employer followed fair disciplinary procedures.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Substantive justification for termination
The Claimant's lapses and non-compliance with agency management procedures justified dismissal
The Respondent established repeated lapses in company procedures amounting to neglect of duty. The Claimant conceded the work was not done as required by policy guidelines, blaming agents under his supervision. Negligence in performing contractual duties warrants summary dismissal under section 44(4) of the Employment Act, as affirmed in Agnes Kavata Mbiti v Housing Finance Company Limited.
Procedural fairness of the disciplinary process
The process was systematic and lawful; no unfair procedure was applied
The Respondent complied with section 41 of the Employment Act by issuing a notice to show cause, affording the Claimant an opportunity to respond, and informing him of his right to be accompanied by a fellow employee. The court accepted that the Respondent considered the Claimant's written and oral representations before concluding he was culpable.
Burden of proof
The Claimant failed to discharge his burden under section 47 of the Employment Act
The Respondent argued, and the court accepted, that the Claimant did not prove the termination was unfair. His concession that the work was not done per policy guidelines undermined his case, leaving the Respondent's demonstration of valid reasons unchallenged.
Legal principles established
#- Termination of employment is justified where there is both substantive justification and procedural fairness
Court orders
#- 1.Claim dismissed
- 2.No order as to costs
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction over employment and labour relations claims (Article 162(2) constitutional jurisdiction inferred from the claim's nature; not expressly cited in the extract)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Lagat v Springboard Capital Limited (Cause E579 of 2023) [2024] KEELRC 2005 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2024). Memorandum of Claim dated 14th July 2023. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2024/2005/eng@2024-08-01
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.