Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCPartially AllowedAppeal No. E006 of 2025

Board of Management Sipala Friends Boys High School v Dobister Nanjala

Employment and Labour Relations Court of Kenya
24 September 2026
3,010 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~12 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan court ruled that an employee suspended pending a disciplinary hearing must wait for that process to finish before suing for salary or dismissal.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Employment and Labour Relations Court at Bungoma, per David Nderitu J, allowed the Appellant's appeal against a judgment of the Webuye Principal Magistrates' Court (Hon. P. Y. Kulecho, PM) which had awarded the Respondent leave allowance arrears of Kshs182,510 and salary arrears of Kshs240,682. The Respondent, engaged by letter of 1st January 1997 as a 'Grounds Lady Deployed to the store', was suspended on 14th February 2024 over alleged disclosure of confidential store records, failure to submit ledgers and micromanaging the store. She filed her cause on 21st June 2024, before attending the disciplinary hearing to which she was invited for 8th July 2024. The appellate court held she remained a grounds lady with a last gross salary of Kshs11,244, not a storekeeper; that she was not constructively dismissed and technically remains an employee pending the disciplinary process; and that her suit, filed after only four months of suspension, was premature and an abuse of court process. The trial court's judgment and decree were set aside in their entirety and the cause dismissed, with a direction that the Appellant jumpstart and conclude the disciplinary process, liberty to return to court thereafter, and each party bearing own costs in both courts.

Key legal issues

#
01

Nature of the Respondent's employment and her basic terms

Holding

The Respondent was engaged as a grounds lady attached to the store, not as a storekeeper, and her last gross salary was Kshs11,244 as per the payroll

Reasoning

The appointment letter of 1st January 1997 described her as 'Grounds Lady Deployed to the store'. Absent any letter changing her status, she remained a grounds lady. The payroll produced by the Appellant showed a gross salary of Kshs11,244 at suspension, unrebutted by the Respondent.

p. 8
02

Whether the Respondent was constructively dismissed or remains an employee

Holding

She was not dismissed; she remains an employee pending completion of the disciplinary process, and her suit was premature and an abuse of process

Reasoning

The Respondent was suspended on 14th February 2024 and invited to a disciplinary hearing on 8th July 2024. She filed suit after only four months of suspension, preempting the imminent disciplinary process. The trial court should have stayed or struck out the cause. The disciplinary process can still be jumpstarted.

p. 12
03

Whether the trial court's awards of salary and leave allowance arrears were correct

Holding

The awards were wrong, being premised on the misapprehension that the Respondent was no longer an employee and on a storekeeper's wage rather than her actual salary

Reasoning

The trial court awarded salary arrears based on the regulated storekeeper wage, yet the Respondent was a grounds lady earning Kshs11,244 gross. The awards rested on the mistaken premise of constructive dismissal; the entire judgment was therefore set aside and the cause dismissed.

p. 14

Legal principles established

#
  • An employee on suspension pending a disciplinary process remains an employee, and filing suit before the disciplinary process concludes is premature and an abuse of court process
  • A suspension of about four months before a disciplinary hearing is not inordinate or unreasonable so as to found constructive dismissal

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Declared that the claim by the Respondent in the lower trial court was filed prematurely and in abuse of the court process
  2. 2.Set aside the judgment of the lower trial court and the decree therein in their entirety and substituted with an order dismissing the cause
  3. 3.Ordered the Appellant to jumpstart and conclude the disciplinary process against the Respondent as soon as practically possible in accordance with the law
  4. 4.Granted any aggrieved party liberty to approach a court for appropriate remedy upon conclusion of the disciplinary process
  5. 5.Each party to meet own costs in the lower trial court and in this appeal

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Employment Act, 2007Section 89
  • Employment Act, 2007Section 10
  • Employment Act, 2007Section 74
  • Regulation of Wages (General) (Amendment) Order, 2018
  • Regulation of Wages (General) (Amendment) Order, 2019

Cases cited (3)

  • Selle V Associated Motor Boat Co. Ltd
    (1968) E.A 123

    Duty of a first appellate court to relook and evaluate the evidence and findings of the trial court

  • Abigael Jepkosgei Yator V China Hanan International Co. Ltd
    (2018) eKLR

    Employer as custodian of employment records must dislodge an employee's allegation by availing records, failing which the claim stands unchallenged

  • Ishmael Otieno Ondigo V African Portland Cement Company Limited
    (2015) eKLR

    Continuing injury not limited to three years under Section 89 if claim filed within one year; employer's duty to keep and produce records under Sections 10 and 74

On appeal from
Webuye Principal Magistrates' Court (ELRC No. E026 of 2024)
ELRC No. E026 of 2024
Jurisdiction invoked
First appellate jurisdiction over the Webuye Principal Magistrates' Court ELRC cause (Employment and Labour Relations Court at Bungoma, Appeal No. E006 of 2025)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Board of Management Sipala Friends Boys High School v Dobister Nanjala", Case Analysis (2026). Appeal No. E006 of 2025. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2026/2568/eng@2026-09-24

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.