Wafula v Principal, Masimba High School & another (Cause E066 of 2023) [2025] KEELRC 895 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan school couldn't legally stop an employee's salary entirely without suspending him or following any disciplinary process, and now owes him over Kshs. 769,000.
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 stoppage of the Claimant's salary was unlawful
- 2.Whether the Claimant is entitled to reliefs sought
Key legal issues
#Whether the stoppage of the Claimant's salary was unlawful
The stoppage of salary was unlawful
The salary was stopped after the Claimant recorded a statement with the DCI, but he was never charged with any offence, never suspended, and never subjected to any disciplinary procedure. Neither a show cause letter nor a suspension letter was proved to have been served. Even if suspension had been warranted, only half salary could have been withheld. The Respondents had resiled from the contract.
Whether the Claimant was entitled to the reliefs sought
Partially - unpaid salaries, one month's notice pay and two months' compensation awarded, but salary pegged at Kshs. 41,000/- per the Ministry of Education directive
The Court adopted the Ministry of Education directive capping a bursar's salary at Kshs. 41,000/- as the competent award sum, rejecting the claimed Kshs. 114,000/-/140,000/-. Having found the termination of services effected through the Respondents' conduct, it awarded notice pay and modest compensation given the Claimant could still seek employment.
Whether the amended response and counterclaim filed without leave should stand
The counterclaim was dismissed
Pleadings had closed by early 2024 after the 2023 suit was filed. The Respondents amended their response twice in mid-2024 without seeking or obtaining leave of the Court, contrary to the procedural rules, so the purported counterclaim had no legal foundation.
Legal principles established
#- A complete stoppage of an employee's salary without suspension or disciplinary process is unlawful; at most, a suspended employee would be entitled to half salary during suspension
- A party cannot file an amended defence and counterclaim without leave of the court after pleadings have closed
Court orders
#- 1.Unpaid salaries from February 2023 to May 2024 (16 months) less Kshs. 10,000/- paid = Kshs. 646,000/-
- 2.One month's salary as notice – Kshs. 41,000/-
- 3.Compensation for dismissal without following procedure equivalent to 2 months' salary – Kshs. 82,000/-
- 4.Interest at court rates on the sums awarded from the date of judgment till payment in full
- 5.Costs limited solely to the sums awarded
- 6.The counterclaim is dismissed with no order as to costs
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 and Article 162(2) of the Constitution (employment and labour relations dispute)
Relief refused
#Respondents' counterclaim for allegedly inflated salary
Filed without leave of the court after pleadings had closed
Claimant's claim for damages for violation of right to fair labour practices beyond compensation awarded
Court awarded compensation of two months' salary instead, taking into account the circumstances
Costs
Costs limited solely to the sums awarded in a), b) and c); counterclaim dismissed with no order as to costs
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.
The Court therefore finds in favour of the Claimant on the first question, to wit, the stoppage of salary was unlawful. If the Claimant was entitled to be suspended, he would have been entitled to half salary for duration of suspension. A complete stoppage of salary was therefore unlawful in the circumstances.
Having regard to the directive by the Ministry of Education on salary for a Bursar, I find that the competent sum to award would be Kshs. 41,000/- as contained in the directives by the Ministry of Education on pay for a Bursar.
The attempt to file a counterclaim without leave in mid 2024 was misplaced and without any legal foundation. The counterclaim is thus dismissed with no order as to costs.
e. Costs limited solely to the sums awarded in a), b) and c) above. It is so ordered.
Issues in the judgment
#Judgment records two different figures for the Claimant's alleged salary - Kshs. 114,000/- per the Respondents' witnesses and the Court's summary, versus approximately Kshs. 140,000/- per the Claimant's cross-examination
The case title, case number and neutral citation do not appear in the text of the judgment provided; only the delivery date and judge are stated
The witnesses' arithmetic on the Ministry of Education bursar salary band appears internally inconsistent - the School's band stated as Kshs. 15,000/- to Kshs. 10,000/- for a CPA 1
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Wafula v Principal, Masimba High School & another (Cause E066 of 2023) [2025] KEELRC 895 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/895/eng@2025-03-19
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.