Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCPartially AllowedELRC Appeal No. E021 of 2025· [2026] KEELRC 2573 (KLR)

Alfred Murunga Wekesa & Abigael Nafula Sifuna (Suing as the legal Representative of the Estate of the late Wycliffe Misiko Wekesa) v The Board of Management Uhuru High School

Employment & Labour Relations Court
25 September 2026
2,184 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~9 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Employment Court ruled a school unfairly terminated a security guard for desertion because it never gave him a hearing, awarding his estate Kshs.158,411.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This is a first appeal to the Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nakuru against the judgment and decree of Hon. E. Soita, Senior Resident Magistrate, delivered on 1st April 2025 in Nakuru CM ELRC No 48 of 2021, dismissing the claim of the estate of the late Wycliffe Misiko Wekesa, a daytime security guard employed by the Board of Management Uhuru High School. The appellants, the legal representatives of the estate, contended the deceased was verbally dismissed while indisposed without a show-cause letter or disciplinary hearing, and sought notice pay, compensation for unlawful termination, underpayment, off-duty, public holiday and overtime dues. The respondent maintained the deceased absconded duty and that the trial court's dismissal was sound. The appeal was disposed of by written submissions. Applying the first-appeal duty to re-evaluate evidence (Selle v Associated Motor Boat Co. Ltd), the court found the employer failed to prove desertion and failed to comply with the mandatory safeguards of sections 41, 43 and 45(2) of the Employment Act: the deceased was never invited to a disciplinary hearing nor notified of intended termination on grounds of desertion; he was simply asked to go home to heal and his salary was stopped. The court held the deceased was unfairly terminated and allowed the appeal. It awarded one month's salary in lieu of notice (Kshs.14,401) and ten months' salary as compensation under section 49(1)(c) (Kshs.144,010), but refused the claims for underpayment, overtime, off-duty and public holiday dues as not factually proved, holding awards cannot be granted in abstract. The estate was awarded costs of the suit and interest at 14% per annum from the date of judgment until full payment.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the deceased's termination for alleged desertion was procedurally and substantively fair

Holding

The termination was unfair; the employer failed to comply with sections 41, 43 and 45(2) of the Employment Act despite tracing the deceased

Reasoning

The court found no evidence the deceased was invited to a disciplinary hearing or notified of intended termination on grounds of desertion. He was merely asked to go home to heal and his salary was stopped. Even if desertion were proved, section 44(4)(a) summary dismissal still required the section 41 fair-hearing process. The employer's failure struck at the core of procedural and substantive justice.

p. 10
02

Whether the trial magistrate's judgment dismissing the claim should be set aside

Holding

The appeal succeeds; the trial court erred in dismissing the claim despite the employer's failure to prove desertion or fair procedure

Reasoning

As a first appeal, the court re-evaluated the evidence. The trial magistrate held no case was established despite the employer's failure to prove desertion or comply with mandatory statutory safeguards. The court found the deceased was unfairly terminated and allowed the appeal, awarding notice pay and compensation.

p. 11
03

Whether the ancillary claims for underpayment, overtime, off-duty and public holiday dues were proved

Holding

Not proved; the court cannot grant awards in abstract

Reasoning

The appellants sought substantial sums for underpayment, overtime, off-duty and public holiday dues, but the court found these were not factually proved, applying the evidentiary burden in sections 107, 108 and 109 of the Evidence Act that he who alleges must prove.

p. 12

Legal principles established

#
  • An employer alleging desertion must prove efforts made to trace the employee and notify them of intended termination before termination
  • Termination must have both substantive justification and procedural fairness

Court orders

#
  1. 1.One month salary in lieu of notice of Kshs.14,401/= awarded to the estate of the deceased
  2. 2.Compensation of 10 months' salary under Section 49(1)(c) of the Employment Act amounting to Kshs.144,010/= awarded to the estate
  3. 3.Costs of the suit awarded to the estate
  4. 4.Interest on the total award of Kshs.158,411/= at the rate of 14% per annum from date of judgment till full payment
On appeal from
Magistrates' Court (ELRC), Nakuru
Nakuru CM ELRC No 48 of 2021
Jurisdiction invoked
First appeal from the subordinate court under the Employment Act framework (memorandum of appeal); no specific provision cited

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Alfred Murunga Wekesa & Abigael Nafula Sifuna (Suing as the legal Representative of the Estate of the late Wycliffe Misiko Wekesa) v The Board of Management Uhuru High School", Case Analysis (2026). ELRC Appeal No. E021 of 2025. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2026/2573/eng@2026-09-25

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.