Ochieng v Consolidated Bank of Kenya (Employment and Labour Relations Cause E170 of 2025) [2025] KEELRC 2128 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan employment court refused to restore a dismissed employee's low staff loan rate, ruling that courts cannot rewrite contracts freely signed by the parties.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the interest rate migration from staff (6%) to commercial (18.5%) rates was lawful
It was lawful; the loan offer letters and charge documents made termination of employment the condition precedent to migration, and termination had occurred
The offer letters dated 2013, 2016 and 2020 provided that interest would migrate from staff to commercial rates if employment ended through dismissal. The charge documents reserved the Respondent's right to vary the rate. The letters were executed without any assertion of duress, mistake or undue influence, so the parties are bound. The termination having occurred, the Respondent was entitled to vary the rate.
Whether the pendency of a challenge to the termination entitles the Claimant to retain staff rates
No; the contract of service stands terminated for the moment, and reversion of rates can only be ordered if the termination is ultimately found unfair
The court held that challenging the validity of the dismissal does not suspend the contractual consequences of termination. Appropriate orders on reversion of interest rates can issue at the conclusion of trial if the termination is found unfair. Ordering reversion now would amount to speculation and rewriting the contract.
Whether the Claimant satisfied the Giella v Cassman Brown conditions for an interim injunction
He did not; no prima facie case was demonstrable at the preliminary stage, no irreparable harm was shown, and the balance of convenience favoured upholding the agreement
The Claimant produced no documentary material such as the loan approval guidelines to anchor his victimisation claim, making it impossible to authenticate a prima facie case. A borrower offering property as security cannot claim sale on default occasions irreparable harm. The balance of convenience favoured upholding the parties' agreement on interest rate variation.
Whether a mandatory injunction to revert the rates could issue at the interlocutory stage
No; mandatory injunctions issue at interlocutory stage only in exceptional and clearest cases, which this was not
The court applied the principle that mandatory injunctions are generally granted after full trial. Whether the termination decision will be reversed cannot be determined yet, so ordering reversion now would engage in speculation without sufficient material. The question of the Claimant's continued enjoyment of staff rates must await the final decision on the legitimacy of the termination.
Legal principles established
#- Courts do not rewrite contracts between parties; their role is limited to interpreting and enforcing contractual terms unless vitiating elements such as fraud, undue influence, mistake, misrepresentation or coercion are pleaded and proved.
- A borrower who offers property as security is deemed to appreciate it may be sold on default and cannot allege irreparable harm incapable of compensation in damages.
- A mandatory injunction will not normally issue at the interlocutory stage except for exceptional reasons and in the clearest of cases.
Court orders
#- 1.The application dated 14th May 2025 is declined
- 2.Costs of the application shall abide the outcome of the case
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction over employment and related loan/contractual dispute; application filed in the suit under certificate of urgency
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Ochieng v Consolidated Bank of Kenya (Employment and Labour Relations Cause E170 of 2025) [2025] KEELRC 2128 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). . Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/2128/eng@2025-07-21
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.