Joseph Macharia Nguru v Sojanmi Springfield Ltd
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court ruled an employee's dismissal for assault was justified, but the flawed disciplinary hearing made the termination unfair, entitling him to compensation.
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 dismissal of the claimant was justified
- 2.Whether the respondent afforded the claimant a fair hearing
- 3.Whether the prayers or reliefs sought by the claimant are awardable
Key legal issues
#Whether the summary dismissal was substantively justified
Yes - the respondent proved on a balance of probabilities, through two witnesses including a victim and medical evidence, that the claimant assaulted the farm manager and storekeeper
The onus lay on the respondent under section 43 to prove the misconduct it genuinely believed existed. RW1, a victim of the assault, confirmed the attacks on both himself and the farm manager, corroborated by medical evidence. The court thus found the reason for termination valid and the dismissal substantively justified despite the claimant's denial.
Whether the claimant was afforded a fair hearing under section 41
No - the minutes of the disciplinary hearing depicted a sham process that did not adhere to natural justice, rendering the termination procedurally unfair
Although a show cause letter was issued and a hearing held, the minutes failed to disclose the presiding officer, whether witnesses were called, or whether the claimant could cross-examine them. Applying Agricultural Finance Corporation v Jillo and related authorities on the essential elements of a fair hearing, the court found no evidence of procedural fairness, which alone invalidated the termination.
What reliefs are awardable
One month's compensation, leave pay with leave travelling allowance, and underpayments awarded; notice pay, overtime, travelling allowance and certificate of service refused
Under section 49 the court weighed the claimant's contributory conduct, limiting compensation to one month. Notice pay was covered in final dues; overtime was unproved; the certificate of service was admitted as issued. Leave was computed for the twelve months of the latest contract, with underpayments proved from the wage order and pay slip.
Legal principles established
#- The employer bears the burden of proving both the reason for termination and the fairness of the disciplinary procedure; failure renders termination unfair
- A termination may be substantively valid yet procedurally unfair and hence invalid
- Disciplinary minutes must disclose the presiding officer, the calling of witnesses and opportunity to cross-examine; otherwise the process is a sham
Court orders
#- 1.Award of 1-month compensation for unfair termination of Kshs. 15,652/-
- 2.Award of leave and leave travelling allowance of Kshs. 21,460/-
- 3.Award of underpayments of Kshs. 15,344/-
- 4.Costs and interest on the awarded sums
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment Act, 2007 (ss. 41, 43, 44, 45, 49) - first-instance employment cause
Relief refused
#Notice pay of Kshs. 15,652
Already included in final dues paid to the claimant
Unpaid travelling allowance of Kshs. 20,400
Not awarded in the final damages; only leave travelling allowance of Kshs. 3,400 allowed
Unpaid overtime of Kshs. 98,427
Claimant did not prove hours served in excess of the legal maximum
Compensation of Kshs. 187,824 (12 months)
Reduced to 1 month given the claimant's own conduct contributing to termination
Certificate of service
Claimant admitted he was issued with a certificate of service
Costs
Costs and interest awarded to the claimant (final order iv: 'Costs and interest')
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.
I thus do find that the claimant's termination, though substantively valid, was unproceduraly unfair, hence invalid.
I find the minutes of the disciplinary meeting that were produced herein to depict a sham process that did not adhere to the principles of natural justice.
Having found that the claimant's termination was unproceduraly fair, I do hereby award the following in damages: i. 1-month compensation – Kshs. 15,652/- ii. Leave and leave travelling allowance – Kshs. 21,460/- iii. Underpayments – Kshs. 15,344/- iv. Costs and interest. It is so ordered.
Issues in the judgment
#Caption includes an unrelated appeal number
Judgment date appears to be a future/typographical year
Paragraph 17 misnames the party accorded a fair hearing
Garbled text in citation of Agricultural Finance Corporation v Jillo
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Joseph Macharia Nguru v Sojanmi Springfield Ltd", Case Analysis (2026). MCELRC Cause No. E122 of 2024. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kemc/2026/989/eng@2026-09-29
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.