Thande v National Environment Trust Fund (Netfund) (Cause E868 of 2022) [2025] KEELRC 2572 (KLR)

The court found none of the three contracts incorporated the Human Resource Manual, so its terms did not form part of the Claimant's terms of service. Even assuming the Manual applied, clause 2.6.1 merely required an employee wishing renewal to notify the CEO six months in advance; it left renewal to the employer's discretion. The Claimant also notified her request only four months before expiry. The requirement to give advance notice was not a promise to renew, so no legitimate expectation arose.

The court interpreted section 45(3)(e) as concerned with the concurrence required from the appointing or concurrence-granting authority for extensions of public service contracts, not with imposing a response deadline on the employer vis-à-vis an employee's renewal request. Accordingly the provision did not assist the Claimant.

Under the State Corporations Act, Boards appoint staff, with the only constraint being that terms and conditions must be approved per the constitutional scheme. After the 2010 Constitution, power over terms and conditions moved to the Public Service Commission, so section 5(3) must be read with modifications under section 7 of the Sixth Schedule. The Principal Secretary therefore lacked mandate; moreover, his representative sat on the Board that made the decision, making his attempted reversal paradoxical.

The court reiterated that a fixed term contract ends on its sunset date without creating renewal expectancy. The Respondent, though not obliged to justify non-renewal, explained the decision by reference to the Claimant's lack of degree proof and failure to provide her High School certificate despite reminders; the Claimant conceded in cross-examination the position required a degree. Non-renewal was therefore lawful and not unfair termination.