Mackins v West Nairobi School & another
The bottom line
#What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the separation was a mutual agreement or a unilateral termination
The court found unilateral termination; the respondent failed to prove mutual separation on a balance of probability
The respondent did not produce minutes of the 16 April 2024 meeting allegedly recording mutual agreement. The minutes of 17 April 2024 showed the decision to release the claimant had already been made before the meeting, and no written separation agreement existed. Consensus must be evidenced in writing; discussions alone are insufficient.
Validity of the reason for termination
The alleged lack of ideological alignment was not a valid reason as it lacked supporting evidence
The respondent produced no warning letter for misconduct or poor performance, no agreed targets not met, and no performance improvement plan. The alleged lack of alignment or compatibility therefore lacked basis and was not a valid reason under section 45(2) of the Employment Act.
Whether fair procedure under section 41 of the Employment Act was followed
No fair hearing was accorded; even if the 17 April 2024 meeting were disciplinary, it fell below the statutory threshold
The claimant was not told the meeting was a disciplinary hearing, was not given the allegations, was not informed of her right to be accompanied, and was not given evidence against her. She was only informed of a decision already made, violating section 41 and ILO Convention 158 Articles 4 and 7.
Quantum of relief
Four months' salary (USD 7,576) awarded as compensation; declaration granted; other heads declined
Considering the frustrations faced - premature return to USA, discontinued flight school and son's university, job search abroad, one year of service with no warning letters - the court found four months' salary reasonable and declined the remaining compensatory heads, including salary in lieu of notice since her stay was extended.
Legal principles established
#- A mutual separation agreement must be voluntary, unequivocal, informed and supported by clear evidence of consensus, ideally a written separation agreement
- An employer bears the burden of proving valid reason and fair procedure for termination under section 45(2) of the Employment Act
Court orders
#- 1.Declaration that the termination of employment was unfair and unlawful
- 2.Award of USD 7,576 as compensation for unfair and unlawful termination, less statutory deductions
- 3.Costs of the suit to the claimant plus interest at court rates from the date of judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction under the Employment and Labour Relations Court Act over unfair termination claim
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Mackins v West Nairobi School & another", Case Analysis (2026). Cause E407 of 2024. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2026/2586/eng@2026-09-28
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.