Mathew v County Government of Meru & 3 others (Cause E033 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 1840 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court ruled that even a valid reason for firing an employee is not enough—you must also give notice and a fair hearing, or the termination is unlawful.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the termination of the claimant's contract was unfair and unlawful
The revocation was grounded on a valid reason (employment beyond the mandatory retirement age of 60) but the procedure was unfair because no notice or hearing was given; the termination was therefore unfair and unlawful under section 45 of the Employment Act
Section 45 of the Employment Act requires an employer to prove a valid reason and fair procedure. The court accepted that the claimant was 62 at appointment and that the employer knew his age, but the Auditor General's report and the CPSB circular grounded a valid reason for termination. However, the respondents admitted no prior notice or hearing was given as required under section 41, so the procedure failed and the termination was unfair.
Whether the respondents' jurisdictional objection based on section 77 of the County Government Act and the exhaustion doctrine succeeds
Rejected as raised too late, since the respondents had already submitted to the court's jurisdiction
The objection was raised only in submissions, not in the pleadings at the outset. Having participated in the hearing before the ELRC, the respondents had subjected themselves to the court's jurisdiction and could not belatedly invoke the exhaustion doctrine to defeat the suit.
Whether the claimant was entitled to salary for the unexpired contract period
Declined for lack of evidence
The claim for Kshs.2,441,890 covered salary from June 2022 to September 2024, a period after the contract was revoked. No evidence supported the claim, and the court declined to award salary for a period during which the claimant did not serve.
Legal principles established
#- An employer must prove both a valid reason for termination and adherence to a fair procedure; termination without notice or a hearing violates sections 41 and 45 of the Employment Act and Articles 47 and 236 of the Constitution
- A party cannot belatedly raise the exhaustion doctrine in submissions after submitting to the court's jurisdiction
Court orders
#- 1.A declaration that the revocation of the claimant's contract by the respondents was unfair
- 2.Costs of the suit allowed to the claimant
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction under the Employment Act, 2007 (sections 41 and 45) and Articles 47 and 236 of the Constitution; respondents' objection under section 77 of the County Government Act rejected
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Mathew v County Government of Meru & 3 others (Cause E033 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 1840 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/1840/eng@2025-06-25
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.