Ndirangu v New Kenya Co-operative Creameries (Cause 1243 of 2014) [2025] KEELRC 2942 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Nairobi court ruled the auditor's dismissal had a valid reason but unfair procedure, awarding three months' salary instead of twelve because his conduct contributed to the firing.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the reason for termination was valid and fair under sections 43 and 45 of the Employment Act, 2007
The reason - insubordination for bypassing the reporting line to the Board - was genuine and fair
The claimant admitted breaching the requirement to report through the Chief Internal Auditor. He did not show all senior officers were implicated in his audit report, and his immediate supervisor was in place. The court found the overriding reason of insubordination genuine, existing and fair relative to the claimant's conduct and the respondent's operational systems.
Whether the termination procedure was fair
The termination was procedurally unfair because some panel members were conflicted and the claimant's behaviour at the hearing was not rebutted by the respondent
The claimant faulted the disciplinary panel on the ground that some members were implicated in the audit report he had prepared, amounting to a conflict of interest. His behaviour at the hearing also featured in the dismissal reasons. The respondent failed to rebut these two procedural improprieties, so the termination was procedurally unfair.
Assessment of compensation under section 49 of the Employment Act
Three months' compensation awarded for procedural unfairness given the claimant's contribution to the termination
In applying the section 49 factors, the court held the claimant significantly contributed to his termination because the reason for termination was fair. Compensation was therefore limited to three months' salary for the procedural unfairness, plus undisputed terminal dues.
Legal principles established
#- A termination may be fair on substance (valid reason) yet unfair on procedure where procedural improprieties in the disciplinary process are not rebutted
- An employee's significant contribution to the termination justifies reduced compensation despite procedural unfairness, per section 49 of the Employment Act
Court orders
#- 1.Declaration that the termination was unfair in procedure
- 2.Respondent to pay the claimant Kshs. 433,216.67 less PAYE by 15.12.2025, failing interest at court rates from the date of judgment till full payment
- 3.Respondent to deliver the claimant's certificate of service by 15.12.2025
- 4.Respondent to pay claimant's costs of the suit
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction over employment disputes under the Employment Act, 2007
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Ndirangu v New Kenya Co-operative Creameries (Cause 1243 of 2014) [2025] KEELRC 2942 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in the judgment as provided. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/2942/eng@2025-10-30
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.