Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCPartially AllowedCause No 1610 of 2018· [2025] KEELRC 4 (KLR)

Kenya Tertiary and Schools Workers Union v Heltz Driving School (Academy) (Cause 1610 of 2018) [2025] KEELRC 4 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
16 January 2025
1,518 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~6 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan employment court ruled that firing workers without contacting them or holding a hearing is unlawful, awarding two driving instructors compensation plus costs.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Kenya Tertiary and Schools Workers Union sued Heltz Institute of Advanced Driving on behalf of two grievants, Humphrey G. Ojiambo and Mathew Ng'ang'a, both former Driver Instructors, claiming salary underpayment, overtime, house allowance, leave, notice pay, severance and compensation for unlawful termination following an alleged lockout effective 14th June 2018. The Respondent challenged the competence of the suit on three grounds: absence of a recognition agreement, its own lack of legal capacity following the death of sole proprietor Osman Ahmed Bachani, and sub judice owing to Cause No 1244 of 2018. The court rejected all three objections, holding that union representation does not require recognition, that employees may pursue accrued rights despite the employer's mutation into Heltz School of Advanced Driving Limited, and that the parallel cause concerned recognition, a distinct dispute. On termination, the Respondent alleged the grievants deserted duty, but citing Richard Kiplimo Koech v Yako Supermarket Ltd, the court found the Respondent made no efforts to reach the employees, so the desertion defence failed and the unlawful termination claim stood unchallenged, aggravated by the failure to afford a hearing. The court awarded the 1st Grievant 8 months' salary (Kshs. 108,000) and the 2nd Grievant 6 months' salary (Kshs. 66,000) as compensation, plus one month's salary in lieu of notice each, with interest at court rates, certificates of service and costs. Claims for underpayment, overtime, house allowance, leave, leave travelling allowance and severance were disallowed as unproved.

Key legal issues

#
01

Competence of proceedings: lack of recognition agreement, legal capacity of respondent, and sub judice

Holding

Proceedings properly before the Court. Representation does not require recognition; the respondent entity carrying on the same business could be sued despite mutation; and the parallel Cause No 1244 of 2018 concerned recognition, not termination, so was not sub judice.

Reasoning

The court held that recognition is not a precondition to union representation, citing Modern Soap Factory as affirmed by the Court of Appeal. The new entity (Heltz School of Advanced Driving Limited) carried on the same business as the late Osman Ahmed Bachani's, so employees could pursue accrued rights despite the employer's mutation. Cause No 1244 of 2018 concerned recognition for collective bargaining, a distinct dispute from the termination claim.

p. 3
02

Whether termination of the Grievants' employment was unlawful

Holding

The claim of unlawful termination was proved; the defence of desertion/absconding failed.

Reasoning

Absconding is a serious offence that may justify dismissal but must be proved. Following Richard Kiplimo Koech v Yako Supermarket Ltd, an employer alleging abscondment must show efforts to reach the employee. The Respondent made no such efforts, so the desertion defence failed and the Grievants' averment of unlawful termination stood unchallenged. The failure to afford a hearing before termination informed the compensation awarded.

p. 4
03

Whether the Grievants were entitled to the remedies sought

Holding

Compensation for unlawful termination (8 and 6 months' salary) and one month's pay in lieu of notice awarded; underpayment, overtime, house allowance, leave, leave travelling allowance and severance claims disallowed as unproved.

Reasoning

The court considered the Grievants' periods of service and employment records, and the Respondent's failure to grant a hearing before termination, in fixing compensation at 8 months (1st Grievant) and 6 months (2nd Grievant). Notice pay was awarded for each. The pecuniary claims of underpayment, overtime, house allowance, leave, leave travelling allowance and severance were not proved and were disallowed.

p. 4

Legal principles established

#
  • A trade union does not need a recognition agreement with an employer to exercise the right of representation of its members
  • Employees cannot be barred from pursuing accrued employment rights merely because the employer entity has mutated or changed form
  • An employer alleging that an employee absconded duty must demonstrate efforts made to reach out to the employee
  • An employer who fails to prove desertion and did not afford the employee a hearing cannot defend a termination claim

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Award of 8 months' salary (Kshs. 108,000) to 1st Grievant and 6 months' salary (Kshs. 66,000) to 2nd Grievant as compensation for unlawful termination of employment
  2. 2.Award of one month's salary in lieu of notice to each Grievant (Kshs. 13,500 and Kshs. 11,000 respectively)
  3. 3.Interest at court rates from the date of judgment until payment in full
  4. 4.Issuance of certificates of service to the Grievants
  5. 5.Costs of the case to the Grievants/Claimant

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Labour Relations ActSection 54(1)

Cases cited (4)

  • Kenya Shoe and Leather Workers Union v Modern Soap Factory
    [2018] eKLR
  • Modern Soap Factory v Kenya Shoe and Leather Workers Union
    [2020] eKLR
  • Kenya Hotels and Allied Workers Union v Diani Sea Resort t/a Carslake Nominee Limited
    [2015] eKLR
  • Richard Kiplimo Koech v Yako Supermarket Ltd
    [2015] eKLR
Jurisdiction invoked
Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction under the Employment and Labour Relations Court Act (original employment dispute)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Kenya Tertiary and Schools Workers Union v Heltz Driving School (Academy) (Cause 1610 of 2018) [2025] KEELRC 4 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Cause No 1610 of 2018. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/4/eng@2025-01-16

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.