Teachers Service Commission v Obi (Employment and Labour Relations Appeal E001 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 1875 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The Employment and Labour Relations Court ruled that disciplinary meeting minutes are not falsified just because one official did not sign them, allowing the TSC appeal to proceed.
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 appeal against the trial magistrate's ruling expunging the disciplinary minutes dated 9/2/2018 and the substituted witness statement of Doris Oyoo is merited
Key legal issues
#Whether the trial magistrate erred in concluding the disciplinary minutes of 9th February 2018 were falsified
The finding of falsification was unsupported by evidence; the Teachers Service Commission Act and the TSC Code of Regulations clause 151 require only that a commissioner chair the disciplinary panel, and Commissioner Kinoti Imanyara signed the minutes as Chairperson
The minutes showed members present including Dr. Lydia Nzomo as chairperson, with Commissioner Kinoti Imanyara ticked and signing as Chairperson. Under Section 47 of the TSC Act and clause 151 of the Code of Regulations, the committee was well constituted. Allegations of falsification against public officers were generalised and serious and required investigation and full evidentiary testing, not summary determination at an interlocutory stage.
Whether the trial court erred in expunging the substituted witness statement of Doris Oyoo and supplementary documents
The trial court erred; leave to substitute the witness had been granted by Justice O. Makau on 12th July 2022, and the Respondent's application had not sought expungement of the supplementary documents, so the court acted outside the pleadings
The record showed an oral application before Hon. Justice O. Makau on 12th July 2022 granting leave to substitute the witness. The Respondent's application only sought expungement of the minutes (TSC/DISC/074, appendix 6). Expunging the witness statement and second supplementary list of documents, which were not the subject of the application, amounted to an overreach beyond what was pleaded.
Legal principles established
#- Without evidence that minutes were forged or falsified, a court cannot conclude falsification merely because the commission chairperson did not sign; it suffices that a commissioner chaired the disciplinary hearing
- Courts are bound by the pleadings of the parties and cannot adjudicate on claims or defences not pleaded
- A first appellate court must re-assess, re-evaluate and re-analyse the evidence and reach its own conclusions while allowing for the absence of first-hand view of witnesses
Court orders
#- 1.The appeal dated 29th April 2024 is allowed
- 2.Case to proceed for hearing before another court other than Hon. F.M. Nyakundi
- 3.Parties to take a hearing date speedily
- 4.Each party to bear their own costs of the appeal
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- On appeal from
- Principal Magistrate's Court (Kericho)
- Kericho CMELRC No. E015 of 2022
- Jurisdiction invoked
- First appellate jurisdiction over the subordinate court ruling (ELRC appeal from Kericho CMELRC No. E015 of 2022)
Relief refused
#Costs of the appeal
The court ordered each party to bear their own costs instead of awarding costs to the Appellant
Costs
The Respective parties to bear their costs of this appeal
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 is persuaded the appeal dated 29th April 2024 is merited and so is granted. Case to proceed for hearing before another court rather than before Hon. F.M. Nyakundi. Parties to take a hearing date speedily.
The Respective parties to bear their costs of this appeal
Indeed, without any evidence that the minutes were forged or falsified the court cannot conclude that since Dr. Nzomo did not sign the minutes then they were falsified.
The trial court engaged in an over kill in expunging the witness statement and second supplementary list of documents which he described as all irregular.
Issues in the judgment
#The judgment's opening paragraph describes the Appellant's prayer for the Ruling to be set aside, but the disposition does not expressly state whether the ruling of 13th December 2023 was set aside, only that the appeal is granted and the matter transferred
Paragraph 19 states the trial magistrate expunged the witness statement of Prisca Nyoro, whereas the rest of the judgment and the memorandum of appeal concern the substituted witness statement of Doris Oyoo
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Teachers Service Commission v Obi (Employment and Labour Relations Appeal E001 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 1875 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Kericho CMELRC No. E015 of 2022 (Appeal dated 29th April 2024). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/1875/eng@2025-06-27
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.