Kamunyu v Safaricom PLC (Judicial Review E066 of 2021) [2025] KEELRC 28 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The Employment Court refused Safaricom's attempt to stop a former executive's judicial review challenge, confirming courts can review unfair disciplinary processes.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Exhaustion of internal disciplinary and appeal mechanisms before judicial review
The court did not accept that failure to exhaust internal mechanisms warranted striking out the judicial review application at this stage
The Respondent contended the Applicant bypassed internal appeal mechanisms under the Disciplinary Policy and that judicial review is a remedy of last resort requiring exceptional circumstances. The court observed that the Applicant approached the court specifically on the illegality and unfairness of the disciplinary process, and that leave had already been granted on the face of the record; vacating the interim orders would nullify the judicial review process.
Whether to vacate the stay orders preserving the disciplinary status quo
Stay orders were retained to preserve the integrity of the judicial review proceedings
The court reasoned that the stay was issued to preserve the integrity of the judicial review process without delving into the merits of the disciplinary process. Setting aside the stay after granting leave would be inconsistent and would destroy the substratum of the entire application, so the Respondent's application failed.
Nature of judicial review
Judicial review addresses the fairness and legality of the process, not the merits of the decision
Both parties framed their arguments around the legality and fairness of the disciplinary process rather than its merits. The court confirmed this understanding and justified its prior grant of leave and stay on the face of the record showing a process warranting review.
Legal principles established
#- Vacating interim stay orders granted to preserve judicial review proceedings would destroy the substratum of the application
- Judicial review applications deal with processes and not the merits of the decision
Court orders
#- 1.The Respondent's application dated 4th December 2024 is disallowed
- 2.Costs in the judicial review application
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and Labour Relations Court Act, 2011, Section 12; Fair Administrative Actions Act, Sections 2 and 9
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Kamunyu v Safaricom PLC (Judicial Review E066 of 2021) [2025] KEELRC 28 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Judicial Review application (application dated 4th December 2024; leave application dated 29th November 2024). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/28/eng@2025-01-16
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.