Nyangechi v Urgent Cargo Logistics Limited (Employment and Labour Relations Appeal E011 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 3744 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Employment Court confirmed that a driver's dismissal after a self-involving accident was fair, because the employer followed proper disciplinary procedure.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the Appellant was lawfully and procedurally terminated
Yes. The police abstract showing a self-involving accident was the reliable document; the Appellant lied to management that the road was blocked by police; and the disciplinary process (show cause, response, hearing notice, hearing, right to accompaniment, appeal right) satisfied sections 43, 45 and 41 of the Employment Act.
The court applied section 43's burden on the employer and section 47(5)'s allocation of the evidential burden, finding the Appellant failed to show unfair termination on a balance of probabilities. Relying on KRA v Reuwel Waithaka Gitahi, the court held the employer need not prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Section 41 compliance was demonstrated: show cause letter, response, disciplinary hearing invitation dated 10th December 2021 for 14th December 2021, minutes, right to be accompanied, and an appeal right in the dismissal letter, none of which was exercised.
Whether the discrepancy between the oral judgment of 18th December 2023 and the written judgment of 7th May 2024 vitiated the judgment
No. The ground fails; delay alone does not invalidate a judgment absent demonstrated prejudice or miscarriage of justice, and the trial court considered all evidence and submissions.
The court endorsed the Respondent's position that oral judgments may differ in form from written ones without the written version being flawed, and that a five-month delay is unfortunate but insufficient absent demonstrated prejudice. The court also held the trial court engaged with the substance of the dispute, so absence of express citation to each submission does not amount to non-consideration.
Whether the Appellant was entitled to terminal dues and reliefs
Partly. Having been fairly terminated, the Appellant was not entitled to compensation or notice pay; claims for salary arrears, leave pay, overtime, public holidays and service pay all failed, though terminal dues generally remain payable regardless of the fairness of termination.
The court reiterated that terminal dues are payable regardless of whether termination is fair or unfair, but on the evidence each claimed item failed: payslips covered the salary claim, leave approvals rebutted the leave claim, overtime and public holiday claims were not precisely pleaded, and NSSF membership excluded service pay under section 35(6). The court directed the Appellant to collect his certificate of service.
Legal principles established
#- The duty of the first appellate court is to re-evaluate the evidence on both law and fact and come to its own findings while making due allowance for not having seen or heard the witnesses
- The standard of proof in employment termination disputes is a balance of probabilities, not beyond reasonable doubt; the employer need only prove reasons it genuinely believed to exist, and courts should not substitute their own view of reasonableness for that of the employer
- Section 41 of the Employment Act is couched in mandatory terms and failure to follow it renders the outcome unfair
Court orders
#- 1.The Appeal is dismissed with costs to the Respondent
- 2.It is so ordered
- On appeal from
- Magistrates' Court (Employment and Labour Relations)
- not stated in judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- First appellate jurisdiction over the subordinate court's judgment in an employment claim (ELRC Appeals Division); memorandum of appeal dated 16th January, 2024
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Nyangechi v Urgent Cargo Logistics Limited (Employment and Labour Relations Appeal E011 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 3744 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Memorandum of Appeal dated 16th January, 2024 (number not stated in judgment). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/3744/eng@2025-12-19
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.