Wainaina v Principal Secretary Ministry of Education State Department for Higher Education & Research & 4 others (Petition E011, E022 & E025 of 2025 (Consolidated)) [2025] KEELRC 1203 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Employment Court ordered Kenyatta University to reinstate Prof Wainaina as Vice Chancellor, ruling his contract runs to January 2026 despite his reaching retirement age.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the petitioner's contract as Vice Chancellor runs to 26th January 2026 notwithstanding his attaining the mandatory retirement age of 75 years on 15th July 2025
The court found the petitioner has two contracts: as Vice Chancellor ending 26th January 2026 and as Professor ending 30th June 2026, and ordered that he resume duty and complete his tenure as Vice Chancellor per his contract.
The court accepted that the petitioner attained retirement age on 15th July 2025 but held that under the terms of service for academic staff he ceases duty on the 30th June following retirement. The conciliators found the contract binding and should flow uninterrupted to January 2026. The court found two contracts exist and granted resumption of duty forthwith.
Whether the 2013-2017 UASU CBA governs the petitioner's employment
The court could not find that the 2013/2017 CBA does not apply because the 3rd respondent failed to produce the successor 2024 agreement for the court's appraisal.
The respondents claimed a fresh 2024 CBA replaced the 2013-2017 CBA and set retirement at 74 years, but did not submit the said consultation agreement to court. Without evidence of its contents, the court could not with certainty find the earlier CBA inapplicable.
Whether the petitioner proceeded on his annual and sabbatical leave per the HR manual
The court found the petitioner is currently serving his leave but the exact number of days could not be ascertained absent evidence.
The court noted the petitioner's own letter of January 2025 shows he is on leave. However, no documentary evidence was produced to quantify the leave days, so no definitive finding on the quantum of leave entitlement was possible.
Legal principles established
#- Where an employment contract exists and is admitted to be binding, the officer should be allowed to serve the remainder of the contract term.
- A public university officer serving on a contract appointment retains an underlying permanent and pensionable position as professor to which he reverts on expiry of the contract.
Court orders
#- 1.The petitioner/applicant Prof Wainaina should be allowed to resume duty forthwith and complete his tenure as Vice Chancellor as per his contract.
- 2.The applicant should be allowed to revert back to his Professor's position upon termination of his Vice Chancellor's position until his retirement age.
- 3.The other pending issues be canvassed in the petition.
- 4.Costs in the petition.
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Article 165 of the Constitution read together with Section 15 of the Employment and Labour Relations Court Act
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Wainaina v Principal Secretary Ministry of Education State Department for Higher Education & Research & 4 others (Petition E011, E022 & E025 of 2025 (Consolidated)) [2025] KEELRC 1203 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). ELRC Petition E011 of 2025 (consolidated with ELRC Pet E022 of 2025 and ELRC Pet E025 of 2025). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/1203/eng@2025-04-30
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.