Obondo v Izwe Loans Limited (Cause E901 of 2021) [2025] KEELRC 1487 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Employment Court upheld a dismissal where the employer followed fair procedure and proved valid misconduct grounds, so the employee's claim failed with costs.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Procedural fairness of the dismissal under Section 41 of the Employment Act
The dismissal was procedurally fair; the Claimant was issued a show cause letter, responded to it, was invited to a disciplinary hearing with rights of representation, cross-examination and to present evidence, and was informed of his right of appeal which he exercised
The court traced the chronology: show cause letter dated 29th April 2021 itemising four charges, the Claimant's written response of 3rd May 2021, an invitation to the hearing of 13th May 2021 notifying him of his rights to representation, to cross-examine witnesses and present evidence, the hearing and verdict, and the appeal. Applying the Postal Corporation minimum standards, all elements of a fair hearing were met, so Section 41 was satisfied.
Substantive fairness and validity of the reasons for dismissal under Section 45
The Respondent had valid, fair and justified grounds to dismiss the Claimant for gross misconduct - receiving allowances for marketing trips he did not make
The Claimant admitted in his response to the show cause letter and in cross-examination that there were days he did not travel for marketing despite being facilitated, and he lacked any communication informing the Respondent of reasons for not travelling. He also sought forgiveness and leniency in his appeal. Applying Section 45 and the Isindu burden on the employer, the Respondent proved valid and fair reasons related to the Claimant's conduct.
Whether the appeal process breached natural justice because members of the disciplinary panel sat on the appeal
Rejected; the Respondent's evidence was that the Managing Director and joint MD sat on the appeal panel and did not sit in the disciplinary hearing
RW1 clarified on re-examination that Sarah Teko did not sit in the appeal but only communicated the verdict by email, and that the appeal panel members had not sat in the disciplinary hearing. The Claimant's allegation of sitting on one's own cause was therefore not established.
Legal principles established
#- A dismissal is fair and lawful where the employer adheres to Sections 41, 43, 45 and 47(5) of the Employment Act, 2007
- Serving a show cause letter, inviting the employee to an oral hearing, and allowing representation, witnesses and production of documents constitutes fair procedure under Section 41
Court orders
#- 1.The Claimant's suit is dismissed in its entirety
- 2.Costs of the suit awarded to the Respondent
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction under the Employment Act, 2007 (first-instance employment claim)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Obondo v Izwe Loans Limited (Cause E901 of 2021) [2025] KEELRC 1487 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/1487/eng@2025-05-22
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.