Sirari v British Broadcasting Corporation & 2 others (Cause 287 of 2019) [2025] KEELRC 1293 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Employment Court upheld the BBC's dismissal of a journalist over a forged hotel invoice, confirming employers win when they follow fair process and prove genuine misconduct.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the summary dismissal was procedurally fair under Section 41 of the Employment Act
The dismissal was procedurally fair; the Claimant was informed of the charges, given an opportunity to respond, informed of his right to representation, and had an appeal heard
The court traced the chronology: a fact-finding meeting on 6th March 2018 attended with a colleague, a notice to show cause dated 11th March 2018, a disciplinary hearing on 14th March 2018, and a written appeal decided by the 3rd Respondent. Although the Claimant wanted an external KUJ representative, the CBA and Handbook limited representation to fellow employees or shop floor stewards, several of whom were available, and he opted to appear without one. Guided by Chitavi and other authorities, the court concluded the process met Section 41.
Whether there was a valid and justified reason for the dismissal
The Respondents proved on a balance of probability that the fraudulent expense claim and forged invoice justified the dismissal; the union-victimisation allegation had no evidentiary support
The court applied Section 43 and the KPLC v Wasike subjective-test formulation. The hotel's General Manager confirmed the invoices were fake, the hotel's records showed no occupation by the Claimant or any 'Bernard Juma', and the Claimant never explained the fraudulent invoices, only insisting they were genuine while shifting the burden to the hotel. The court found no evidence linking the dismissal to union activities and held the burden of proving his hotel stay rested on the Claimant.
Whether the Claimant was entitled to the reliefs sought
All reliefs fail because the dismissal was found fair
The court held that the declaration, loss of income to retirement, leave pay, notice pay, reimbursement of deductions, and general and exemplary damages for malice were all premised on unfair dismissal. Having found the dismissal both procedurally and substantively fair, no relief was tenable and the entire suit was dismissed with costs to the Respondents.
Legal principles established
#- An employer must satisfy both procedural fairness under Section 41 and substantive justification under Sections 43 and 45 of the Employment Act to sustain a summary dismissal
- The reasons for termination are those the employer genuinely believed to exist at the time of dismissal, and the employer bears the burden of proving them on a balance of probability
Court orders
#- 1.The Claimant's claim is dismissed in its entirety
- 2.Costs to the Respondents
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction under the Employment and Labour Relations Court Act and the Employment Act, 2007
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Sirari v British Broadcasting Corporation & 2 others (Cause 287 of 2019) [2025] KEELRC 1293 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). ELRC Cause Number 287 of 2019 (originally ELRC Cause Number 251 of 2018, Nakuru). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/1293/eng@2025-05-08
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.