Kisaka v Consolidated Bank of Kenya Limited (Cause E037 of 2025) [2025] KEELRC 2991 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Mombasa court ruled a bank unfairly sacked its branch manager, awarding him about Ksh 3.45 million and letting him keep his staff-rate mortgage.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Validity of reasons for termination
The summary dismissal was invalid and unreasonable; the alleged breach of credit policy occurred in the credit department, not with the claimant, who only recommended the facilities.
The internal audit found that MCC members were misled by the credit department and recommended refresher training for them, while members of the credit department who were mentioned were not disciplined. Blaming the claimant, the proposer rather than the approver, was shifting responsibility to the wrong employee.
Procedural fairness under section 41
The process was unfair; only two employees including the claimant were suspended and denied full access to work records, while credit department employees mentioned in the audit were not disciplined.
The claimant's detailed response was corroborated by the audit investigations. Denying him full access to records needed for his defence, while others implicated escaped the process, showed selective and unfair application of the disciplinary process.
Remedies for unfair termination
Ten months' compensation was justified given 14 years of unblemished service, and the claimant may continue repaying his mortgage at the staff rate of 6%.
The claimant served from 2010 to 2024 with no poor record. Following Chepkoit and Gisemba, the mortgage benefit accrued during employment and its terms should not be altered upon unfair termination, as that would amount to double punishment.
Legal principles established
#- An employee is entitled to due process and procedural rights under section 41 of the Employment Act before termination, including being informed of accusations, given a chance to defend himself, permitted to call witnesses and notified of the decision.
- Termination reasons must be genuine, valid and reasonable, and the employee must be found directly culpable on all the facts before liability is fixed.
- Upon unfair termination, an employee should not lose employment-linked benefits such as a staff-rate mortgage; changing the mortgage terms would constitute double punishment.
Court orders
#- 1.Declaration that the employment was terminated unfairly
- 2.Compensation of Ksh. 3,458,750 (ten months' gross salary at Ksh. 343,875, though the disposition figure is stated as Ksh. 3,458,750 while the computation paragraph states Ksh. 3,438,750)
- 3.The claimant shall continue to repay the mortgage loan at an interest rate of 6%
- 4.Costs of the suit to the claimant
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Articles 41 and 47 of the Constitution; Employment Act (sections 41, 43, 44, 45, 47)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Kisaka v Consolidated Bank of Kenya Limited (Cause E037 of 2025) [2025] KEELRC 2991 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Cause No E037 of 2025. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/2991/eng@2025-10-30
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.