SheriaNet for Android — search and read Kenyan case law from your phone, offline.
Join the beta →

ABEL MARCEL OKOTH OKELLO V KENYA MEDICAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE [2013] KEELRC 342 (KLR)

[2013] KEELRC 342 (KLR) Employment & Labour Relations Court
Read PDF
Court
Employment & Labour Relations Court
Case number
342
Citation
[2013] KEELRC 342 (KLR)
Decided
19 March 2013
Beta Machine-generated summary. Automatically produced by AI from the judgment text — it may be incomplete or inaccurate. Always verify against the full judgment below. Not legal advice.

Summary at a glance

TypeUnfair and unlawful termination of employmentPostureAppeal from an original trialCoramHON. LADY JUSTICE MAUREEN ONYANGO, OBOK
The Court finds the termination of the Claimant's contract of employment was actuated by bad faith and awards 12 months salary as compensation and Shs.241,956.24 as gratuity.

Facts

The Claimant, Abel Marcel Okoth Okello, was employed by the Respondent, Kenya Medical Research Institute, as a Space and Safety Manager on a 6-year contract expiring on August 14, 2011. He was promoted to Deputy Operations Chief until June 23, 2010, when he was terminated. He was on paternity leave when the termination letter was served on him. He had been suspended on June 23, 2010, for using the Respondent's Power Generator without involving his supervisor and lying to a Security Officer. The suspension was lifted on May 24, 2010, and he was re-instated.

Issues

  • Unfair termination of employment
  • Compensation for unfair termination
  • Gratuity
  • Severance pay

Reasoning

The Court found the termination was unfair and actuated by bad faith, given the short time between the suspension and re-instatement, and the fact that the Claimant was on paternity leave when the termination occurred.

Outcome

Claimant awarded 12 months salary and Shs.241,956.24 as gratuity.

Orders

  • Award of 12 months salary as compensation
  • Award of Shs.241,956.24 as gratuity
⚠ This summary is experimental and generated by a language model, not a lawyer. It can contain errors, omissions, or misinterpretations and must not be relied on for legal decisions. The authoritative source is the full judgment. Please confirm every point against the original before use.
Full judgment 0.1 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case