Kenya Union of Domestic Hotels Educational Institutions & Hospital Workers (KUDHEIHA) v Board of Management (BOM) Kalulini Boys Secondary School (Cause E788 of 2023) [2025] KEELRC 1920 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan school won on reasons for firing its bursar but lost on procedure because the same people heard the appeal against their own decision.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Valid and fair reason for termination
The Respondent proved a valid and fair reason related to the grievant's conduct, namely laxity and failure to perform his duties as bursar; however, other grounds (insubordination, failure to honour repayment, staging the theft) were not valid
The Court examined each of the three broad grounds. The insubordination ground failed because the record showed a response to the show cause letter. The repayment ground failed because the Respondent acknowledged receipt of the full Kshs 385,000. There was no evidence of complicity in the theft. However, as senior-most accounting officer, the grievant bore responsibility for accounting tasks including those of the Accounts Clerk on maternity leave, and his laxity gave the employer valid grounds under Section 45(2)(a) and (b).
Procedural fairness
Although the Respondent complied with Section 41 by notification, hearing and union representation, the appeal panel comprised the same members who made the dismissal decision, creating a likelihood of bias that rendered the process not just and equitable
The Court rejected the Claimant's complaints about variance in charges between the show cause and suspension letters and about exclusion of union officials, finding no evidential support for the latter. However, applying Ridge v Baldwin and Section 45(5)(a), the Court found that the Appeal Committee members sat on appeal against their own decision, creating a likelihood of impartiality that marred the entire disciplinary process when viewed holistically.
Remedies
Compensatory damages of three months' gross salary (Kshs 141,195) awarded despite the valid reason, because the dismissal was not just and equitable; notice pay and service pay declined
Having found a valid reason but procedural injustice, the Court exercised discretion under Section 49 to award three months' salary as compensation, taking into account the length of employment and the grievant's contribution to his own termination. Notice pay was declined because the CBA clause applies only to normal terminations. Service pay was barred by Section 35(6) as the grievant contributed to NSSF.
Legal principles established
#- An employer must prove the reason for termination, failing which the termination is unfair under Sections 43 and 45 of the Employment Act
- Members who sat on a disciplinary panel cannot sit on the appeal against their own decision; such likelihood of bias vitiates the process under natural justice principles
- The decision on appeal forms part of the procedure considered in deciding whether termination was just and equitable under Section 45(5)(a)
Court orders
#- 1.Judgment entered against the Respondent
- 2.Compensatory damages of Kshs 141,195.00 being equivalent to three (3) months of the grievant's last gross salary
- 3.Interest on the compensatory damages at court rates from the date of Judgment until payment in full
- 4.The Respondent shall bear the costs of the suit
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction under the Employment Act and Labour Relations Act (not expressly stated; suit filed as a Memorandum of Claim)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Kenya Union of Domestic Hotels Educational Institutions & Hospital Workers (KUDHEIHA) v Board of Management (BOM) Kalulini Boys Secondary School (Cause E788 of 2023) [2025] KEELRC 1920 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/1920/eng@2025-06-27
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.