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

Paul Mwasatu Maganga & 2 others v G4S Kenya Limited [2015] KEELRC 497 (KLR)

[2015] KEELRC 497 (KLR) Employment & Labour Relations Court
Read PDF
Court
Employment & Labour Relations Court
Case number
497
Citation
[2015] KEELRC 497 (KLR)
Decided
2 October 2015
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeEmployment DisputePostureAppeal from original trialCoramONESMUS MAKAU
Holding

The court finds no dispute that a fair procedure was followed in terminating the claimants' services, and the reasons for the dismissal were valid and fair.

Facts

The claimants were employees of G4S Kenya Limited who were dismissed on January 31, 2014, after money was stolen from their vehicle while transporting it from Kilanguni Serana Lodge to Barclays Bank in Voi. The claimants were found guilty of negligence and were dismissed summarily.

Issues

  1. whether the dismissal was unfair and unjustified
  2. whether the reliefs sought should be granted

Reasoning

The court found that the dismissal was fair and justified, as the claimants were found guilty of gross negligence in performing their duties, leading to the theft of client's money. The claimants were found innocent in a separate criminal case.

Outcome

Judgment entered for the claimants for an aggregate sum of Ksh 981,265.85 to be shared as indicated above.

Orders

  • Claimants to be awarded an aggregate sum of Ksh 981,265.85
  • Costs of the suit and interest to be awarded to Paul Mwasafu Maganga and Haron Okindo Omae
  • Each party in ELRCC No 451 of 2014 to bear their own respective costs

Remedies

  • Award of damages and interest

Authorities cited

Legislation (1)
  • Employment Act (EA)
Cases cited (1)
  • Voi Criminal case No. 105 of 2014
Experimental AI summary generated by a language model, not a lawyer. It may contain errors or omissions and must not be relied on for legal decisions — the full judgment below is the authoritative source.
Full judgment 0.1 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case