Mochorwa v Bob Morgan Services Limited (Appeal E315 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 2639 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Employment Court dismissed a security guard's appeal, confirming his firing was fair and his terminal dues were paid.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the termination of the appellant's employment was for valid and fair reasons
Yes. The appellant admitted accessing the client's bag without consent and switching off the ringing phone; his conduct was inconsistent with security duties and the trial court's finding was a reasonable deduction from the evidence.
The minutes of the disciplinary hearing recorded the appellant's admission that he opened and accessed the client's bag without seeking consent, took the ringing phone, switched it off and returned it. The court held that such conduct by a guard assigned security duties, on a drunk and sleeping customer late at night, cut off communication from those seeking his whereabouts, and justified the employer's genuine belief in the reason for termination.
Whether the appellant was paid his terminal dues
Yes. The appellant admitted his salary was regularly paid through his bank and failed to produce a bank statement to show non-receipt of the terminal dues the respondent deposited into his account.
The respondent produced evidence that terminal dues, including gratuity, were processed and paid into the appellant's bank account at CFC-Stanbic. The appellant denied receiving payment but admitted he did not adduce his bank statement to demonstrate non-receipt, so his bare denial could not displace the documentary proof of payment.
The standard of review applicable to a first appellate court
The first appellate court must reconsider and re-evaluate the evidence and draw its own conclusions but must give allowance to the trial court's advantage and will not interfere with reasonable findings.
Guided by Peters v Sunday Post Limited [1958] EA 424, the court held that it is not open to the first appellate court to review the findings of a trial court simply because it would have reached different results. Having re-evaluated the record, the court was satisfied the trial magistrate's findings were reasonable and a fair deduction from the evidence presented by the parties.
Legal principles established
#- On a first appeal, the court is under a duty to reconsider and re-evaluate the evidence and draw its own conclusions, while giving due allowance to the trial court's advantage of seeing and hearing the witnesses, and will not interfere with findings that are reasonable deductions from the evidence.
- An appellate court will not disturb a trial court's decision merely because it would have reached a different result.
Court orders
#- 1.The Appeal is dismissed with costs
- 2.It is so ordered
- On appeal from
- Magistrates' Court (Employment and Labour Relations)
- CMEL NO. 009 of 2021
- Jurisdiction invoked
- First appellate jurisdiction over the trial magistrate's judgment in an employment claim
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Mochorwa v Bob Morgan Services Limited (Appeal E315 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 2639 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Memorandum of Appeal dated 13th December, 2024. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/2639/eng@2025-09-26
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.