Kora v Kenya Kazi Services Limited (Employment and Labour Relations Cause E324 of 2021) [2025] KEELRC 2817 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Employment Court confirmed that an employer can fairly dismiss a driver for gross misconduct if there is a valid reason and a fair disciplinary process.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether the Plaintiff was an employee of the Defendant
- 2.Whether the termination of the Plaintiff was unfair, unlawful and unprocedural
- 3.Whether the Plaintiff is entitled to the reliefs sought in the plaint
Key legal issues
#Whether the summary dismissal of the claimant for gross misconduct following a road traffic accident was fair
The dismissal was fair; the claimant admitted driving on the wrong side of the road and being to blame per the police abstract, giving the employer a valid reason, and the claimant was given a show cause notice, a disciplinary hearing and an appeal
The court noted the claimant's own admissions in cross-examination: that the police abstract showed he was to blame, that he drove on the wrong side of the road, and that he was subjected to an internal disciplinary hearing before dismissal. These admissions established both the validity of the reason for termination (gross misconduct through negligent driving) and procedural fairness (notice, hearing and appeal), satisfying the requirements of Sections 41, 43 and 45 of the Employment Act.
Whether the outcome of a criminal or traffic process affects an employer's internal disciplinary proceedings
As submitted by the defendant and not disturbed, the absence of criminal charges does not invalidate an employer's internal dismissal decision
The defendant relied on authority that criminal proceedings are not binding on an employer's internal proceedings. The court's finding that a valid reason existed rested on the claimant's admissions and internal investigation, independent of any criminal charge being preferred against him.
Legal principles established
#- An employer who establishes a valid reason for termination and follows a fair disciplinary process under the Employment Act does not unfairly dismiss the employee
Court orders
#- 1.The claim is dismissed
- 2.No order of costs
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Original employment and labour relations jurisdiction of the Employment and Labour Relations Court
Relief refused
#Declaration that the disciplinary process was unprocedural, unfair and unlawful
The court found the defendant had a valid reason for dismissal and subjected the claimant to a fair disciplinary process
Payment of terminal dues and salary for the remaining years to retirement
The dismissal being fair, no terminal dues or retirement benefits were payable
General damages for summary dismissal
The claim of unfair dismissal failed and the suit was dismissed in its entirety
Costs
There will be no order of costs.
Quotable passages
#Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.
In view of these facts, the respondents had valid reason to dismiss the claimant. The respondents also subjected the claimant to a fair disciplinary process.
In the circumstances, I do not find the dismissal of the claimant unfair as submitted. The claim therefore fails and is therefore dismissed. There will be no order of costs.
Issues in the judgment
#The judgment contains internally inconsistent dates for the disciplinary process, stating the notice to show cause was issued on 30th May 2019 yet the claimant responded on 6th April 2019 and was heard on 9th April 2019; the employment end date is also variously given as 9th May 2019 and 9th March 2019
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Kora v Kenya Kazi Services Limited (Employment and Labour Relations Cause E324 of 2021) [2025] KEELRC 2817 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in judgment (plaint dated 9th January 2021). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/2817/eng@2025-10-21
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.