Ogwel v Tourism Regulatory Authority (Cause E467 of 2023) [2025] KEELRC 2795 (KLR)
The bottom line
#What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Procedural fairness of the dismissal
The dismissal was procedurally fair - show cause, response, disciplinary hearing with representation and appeal rights were all afforded.
The court applied Section 41 of the Employment Act and the Chitavi formulation. The Claimant received a show cause letter, responded, attended a disciplinary hearing with advice that he could bring a representative, and was informed of his right of appeal. The Respondent therefore ticked every procedural box.
Substantive justification for the dismissal
The dismissal was substantively unjustified; the Claimant's uncontroverted responses and his exoneration by the DCI were ignored, and other officers were not held to account.
The Claimant's specific responses to each charge were not rebutted; the disciplinary committee minutes appeared to agree with his explanation on supplier registration; the DCI exonerated him on falsification; and other adversely mentioned officers (Accounting Officer, Evaluation Committee) were not queried. The decision to summarily dismiss was harsh and outside the band of reasonable responses.
Compensation entitlement
Eight months' salary awarded as compensation, not the maximum twelve, because the Claimant contributed to his dismissal through audit queries in his department.
Relying on Section 49(4) of the Employment Act and Kenfreight v Nguti, the court exercised its discretion. Although the dismissal was too harsh, the Claimant manned the department in which the audit irregularities arose. Maximum compensation was not proved; eight months' salary was deemed sufficient.
Jurisdiction over pension claims
The Court lacks jurisdiction over contributory pension matters, which fall within the Retirement Benefits Authority's remit.
Following the Supreme Court's decision in Albert Chaurembo Mumba, the court held that contributory pension disputes lie with the Retirement Benefits Authority, and the claim for remittance of pension funds therefore failed.
Legal principles established
#- A dismissal is procedurally fair where the employee is informed of charges, afforded a hearing with representation, and informed of the right of appeal.
- Substantive justification requires the employer to prove valid and fair reasons genuinely believed at the time, on the Burchell test.
- Where other officers adversely mentioned in an audit are not held to account, singling out one employee may render dismissal outside the band of reasonable responses.
- A judge who awards the statutory maximum of 12 months' salary without justification exceeds their powers.
Court orders
#- 1.A declaration that the Claimant was wrongfully and unlawfully dismissed
- 2.An order for payment of 8 months' salary as compensation for the wrongful dismissal at Kshs.669,104/-
- 3.An order for payment of 3 months' salary in lieu of notice at Kshs.250,914/-
- 4.The Respondent shall bear the costs of the suit and interests on orders (b) and (c) above, from the date of this judgment until payment in full
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction over employment claims under the Employment Act, 2007
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Ogwel v Tourism Regulatory Authority (Cause E467 of 2023) [2025] KEELRC 2795 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Statement of Claim dated 6th June, 2023. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/2795/eng@2025-10-16
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.