Thomas Waweru Waithera v The Chief Executive Officer, Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission & another
The bottom line
#Kenya's Employment Court ruled that an employer's HR manual is not law, so claims about breaching it must be decided at a full hearing with evidence.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether the Preliminary Objection dated 4th July, 2025, founded on Sections 9(2), 9(3) and 9(4) of the Fair Administrative Action Act, is merited
- 2.Whether the issues raised in the Preliminary Objection are pure points of law capable of determination without ascertainment of facts
Key legal issues
#Whether the preliminary objection on failure to exhaust internal dispute resolution mechanisms is a pure point of law
The objection was not a pure point of law; it was clouded with matters of fact requiring evidence and was dismissed.
The objection required the court to examine the 2nd Respondent's Human Resource and Administration Manual, establish whether it is a valid and applicable internal policy, whether the Claimant was bound by it and whether it formed part of his contract. These are factual questions that cannot be resolved on a preliminary objection under the Mukisa Biscuits test.
Status of employers' HR Manuals and Procedures
HR Manuals are administrative handbooks, not law; allegations of breach require evidence at trial.
The court held that Human Resource and Administration Manuals are guides to ensure smooth operations in an employer's enterprise. They are not law. A party alleging breach must adduce evidence in a trial to prove the allegation, so the objection could not dispose of the suit at the interlocutory stage.
Legal principles established
#- An employer's Human Resource and Administration Manual is not law; breach of its guidelines must be proved by evidence at trial.
- Whether a party has contravened an employer's HR Manual is a question of fact not determinable on a preliminary objection.
Court orders
#- 1.The Respondent's Preliminary Objection dated 4th July, 2025 is dismissed with costs
- 2.The suit shall be fast-tracked and set down for hearing
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction under the Employment and Labour Relations Court Act (suit for unfair termination and unfair labour practice)
Quotable passages
#Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.
I find no merit in the Respondent’s Preliminary Objection dated 4th July, 2025, and the same is hereby dismissed with costs.
The suit herein shall be fast-tracked, and shall be set down for hearing.
Whether or not a party has contravened an employer’s Human Resource and Administration Manual (Policies and Procedures) is a question of fact. Evidence would be required to settle that question.
A Preliminary Objection consists of a point of law which has been pleaded or which arises by clear implication out of pleadings, and which if argued as a preliminary point may dispose of the suit.
Issues in the judgment
#Document bears 'DRAFT' watermark throughout despite being signed and delivered
Response to Claim dated 4th July, 2025 to a claim filed 31st October 2023 - unexplained long gap
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Thomas Waweru Waithera v The Chief Executive Officer, Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission & another", Case Analysis (2026). Cause No. E879 of 2023. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2026/2763/eng@2026-10-02
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.