Moses Echwa v Kenya Airports Authority
The bottom line
#Kenya's Court of Appeal ruled that a justified dismissal stands despite minor procedural slip-ups, so the employee got no compensation and must pay the appeal costs.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether minor procedural infractions render a termination unfair under section 45 of the Employment Act
No. The termination was substantively justified for gross misconduct, and the lapses (short show-cause period, unserved charge sheet) did not offend section 41 or invalidate the process.
The court applied the twin-requirement test from its prior decisions: fairness demands both substantive justification and procedural fairness. Here the employee received a show-cause letter, attended a disciplinary hearing, presented his defence, was notified of the decision, and had his appeal considered. Although the HR Manual procedure was imperfectly followed, the deviations were minor and the core requirements of section 41 of the Employment Act were satisfied, so the dismissal was not unfair.
Whether the appellant was entitled to compensation and other reliefs
No. Having found the dismissal was not unfair, the court held nothing turned on the claim for compensation and declined to disturb the trial court's refusal to award it.
Compensation under section 49 follows a finding of unfair termination. Because the court found the summary dismissal was justified both substantively and procedurally, the entitlement to compensation did not arise, and the trial Judge's finding that the appellant was undeserving of compensation was correct.
Whether the trial Judge acted injudiciously in ordering each party to bear their own costs
No. Departure from the general rule that costs follow the event requires reasons patent on record, and the Judge's findings on procedural shortfalls justified the order.
The court endorsed the principle that costs follow the event but that a court departing from it must give reasons apparent on the record. Since the trial Judge found the disciplinary procedure fell short of certain HR Manual requirements even though this did not invalidate the termination, his direction that each party bear their own costs was a judicial exercise of discretion.
Legal principles established
#- For a termination of employment to be fair, both substantive justification and procedural fairness are required; adhering to one and contravening the other renders the dismissal wrongful.
- Minor procedural infractions in a disciplinary process, where the employee is notified of the reasons, given an opportunity to show cause, heard, and allowed an appeal, do not render a substantively justified termination unfair under section 45 of the Employment Act.
- Where an appeal is needlessly instituted and fails, costs follow the event and the respondent is entitled to the costs of the appeal.
Court orders
#- 1.The appeal is dismissed
- 2.The respondent shall have the costs of the appeal
- On appeal from
- Employment and Labour Relations Court at Mombasa
- Cause No. 302 of 2016
- Jurisdiction invoked
- First appeal to the Court of Appeal under its appellate mandate
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Later judgments citing this (2)
#Judgments in the corpus that rely on this one. Where the Court said how it treated the authority, that is shown.
- Brinks Security Service v Evans (Appeal E010 of 2023) [2025] KEELRC 2055 (KLR)[2025] KEELRC 2055 (KLR)11 Jul 2025followed
- Koech v Ekatera Tea Kenya PLC (Cause E029 of 2023) [2025] KEELRC 1995 (KLR)[2025] KEELRC 1995 (KLR)4 Jul 2025followed
Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Moses Echwa v Kenya Airports Authority", Case Analysis (2024). Employment and Labour Relations Court Cause No. 302 of 2016 (on appeal). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2024/828/eng@2024-07-12
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.