Evans Ogutu Ouma v Migori County Assembly Service Board & another
The bottom line
#Kenya's Employment Court awarded a Migori County Assembly officer 12 months' pay after finding his two dismissals unfair because the disciplinary process kept changing the allegations.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Res judicata and competence of the suit
The suit is not res judicata; the issue was already determined in the Court's ruling of 28th April 2026 and could not be relitigated
The Court noted its earlier ruling found the prior matters were struck out on preliminary and jurisdictional grounds and never determined on the merits, and that the Claimant had exhausted the alternative remedy before the Public Service Commission. Having been determined, the issue was not open for determination again in this suit.
Unfairness of the two summary dismissals
Both dismissals were unlawful, unfair and unconstitutional, failing substantive and procedural fairness
The second dismissal followed a predetermined disciplinary process meant to retrospectively justify the earlier removal; the show-cause allegations, hearing matters and dismissal reasons were materially different, contrary to section 41 of the Employment Act, audi alteram partem, Articles 41, 47 and 50 of the Constitution and section 4 of the Fair Administrative Action Act.
Appropriate remedy
Reinstatement refused; maximum 12 months' compensation under section 49(1)(c) awarded, plus notice pay, accrued leave pay and certificate of service
Given the bad blood between the parties and the political atmosphere that caused the Claimant's woes, reinstatement was inappropriate. The Court awarded the statutory maximum of twelve months' compensation, noting the law caps the award, and relied on Kenfreight v Nguti supporting maximum compensation.
Legal principles established
#- A dismissal is procedurally unfair where the allegations in the show-cause letter, the matters considered at the disciplinary hearing and the reasons relied upon in the dismissal letter are materially different, denying the employee a chance to answer the case against him
- Reinstatement is not an appropriate remedy where bad blood and political circumstances have poisoned the employment relationship; compensation is preferred
Court orders
#- 1.A declaration that the termination meted out was unfair and unlawful
- 2.12 months' compensation in terms of section 49(1)(c) of the Employment Act, amounting to Kshs. 2,331,240/-
- 3.One month's salary as notice - Kshs. 194,270/- in lieu of notice under section 35 of the Employment Act
- 4.73 accrued leave days amounting to Kshs. 384,850.15
- 5.A certificate of service in terms of section 51
- 6.Costs of the suit
- 7.Interest on the compensation, notice pay and leave pay at court rates from the date of judgment till payment in full
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and labour relations jurisdiction under Article 162(2) of the Constitution (ELRC); suit competence previously confirmed in ruling of 28th April 2026
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Evans Ogutu Ouma v Migori County Assembly Service Board & another", Case Analysis (2026). Cause No. E016 of 2025. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2026/2598/eng@2026-09-28
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.