Bank of Africa Wins Case Against Former Treasury Team Leader Over KSh48.18 Million Loss

Former banker Mary Immaculate Wachira lost her unfair dismissal case after validating a KSh48.18 million payment. The court upheld her dismissal and ordered her to pay Bank of Africa KSh9.78 million.

A former Bank of Africa treasury team leader has lost her battle against dismissal.

The Employment and Labour Relations Court upheld the termination on October 1, 2026.

Justice Monica Mbaru found the bank had a valid reason to dismiss Mary Immaculate Wachira.

The judge also found that Bank of Africa followed the required disciplinary process.

The ruling, however, carried a second and heavier financial consequence.

The court allowed the bank’s counterclaim for KSh9.78 million against Wachira.

The amount represented her outstanding loan balance as calculated on September 23, 2022.

Any remaining balance would continue attracting interest until full settlement.

At the centre of the dispute was one disastrous foreign-exchange transaction.

It involved KSh48.18 million and ultimately ended an eight-year banking career.

Fatal Transfer

Wachira joined Bank of Africa in May 2007 as an Operations Assistant.

She rose through the ranks before becoming Team Leader, Treasury Back Office.

Her responsibilities included overseeing foreign-exchange and money-market transactions.

She also had to verify transaction details before forwarding them for approval.

Those responsibilities became critical on July 2, 2015.

The bank received a SWIFT message concerning a USD6 million (K|Sh 778 million) transaction.

Citibank South Africa appeared as the ordering institution in that communication.

According to the bank, Wachira and colleagues misunderstood the transaction details.

They processed it as a ZAR6 million transaction involving Dubai Bank Kenya Limited.

The error led to the release of KSh48.18 million to Dubai Bank.

The funds were released before the corresponding receipt was independently confirmed.

Wachira later discovered the discrepancy during reconciliation the following day.

She notified the dealing team and contacted Dubai Bank about the error.

She also initiated a SWIFT recall on July 9, 2015.

She subsequently reported the incident and prepared a risk-event report.

Dubai Bank acknowledged receiving the funds and promised repayment with 12% annual interest.

The money, however, remained outstanding after Dubai Bank encountered financial difficulties.

For Wachira, the transaction soon became a career-ending episode.

Dismissal Fight

Bank of Africa suspended Wachira on August 20, 2015, pending investigations.

The suspension was later extended while investigations into the transaction continued.

She received a notice to show cause before attending a disciplinary hearing.

The hearing took place on September 22, 2015, according to the judgement.

Wachira admitted validating the transaction but disputed the responsibility assigned to her.

She argued that several officers had participated in processing the payment.

She also said another officer confirmed that the funds had been sighted.

Her defence did not persuade the disciplinary panel.

The Bank of Africa summarily dismissed her on October 22, 2015.

The bank accused her of gross negligence and improper performance of duty.

Wachira then challenged the dismissal before the Employment and Labour Relations Court.

She argued that the bank lacked a valid reason for terminating her.

She also claimed the disciplinary process failed to properly consider her explanation.

Another major part of her defence involved her subsequent criminal prosecution.

Wachira was charged over the transaction but was acquitted on July 12, 2018.

She argued that the acquittal undermined the bank’s allegations of wrongdoing.

The court, however, established a clear distinction between criminal guilt and workplace misconduct.

Acquittal Failed

The court said an employment dispute does not require proof of criminal guilt.

Instead, the employer must establish a genuine reason for terminating employment.

The judgement states that “acquittal of criminal charges is fundamentally different from employment misconduct.”

That distinction proved decisive in Wachira’s case.

The bank did not need to prove that Wachira committed criminal fraud.

It needed to show that she failed her contractual responsibilities.

The court found that evidence sufficient to justify the dismissal.

Wachira’s position as team leader carried particularly demanding responsibilities.

She was expected to independently verify high-value transactions before approving them.

Instead, she relied on verbal confirmation before releasing the KSh48.18 million.

The judge found that approach inadequate within a heavily regulated banking environment.

The judgement emphasised that banking employees handle other people’s money.

It consequently demands “a high degree of integrity, prudence, and financial probity”.

The court therefore found a valid and genuine reason for her termination.

It also found that the bank followed due process before dismissing her.

The process included investigation, suspension, notice, hearing and an appeal opportunity.

Wachira also relied on cases involving colleagues from the same transaction.

Those included Faith Wairimu Munyori and Robert Gatobu Kimonye.

The court declined to automatically apply findings from those separate cases.

Each employee had different contractual responsibilities and different roles.

Wachira, unlike her colleagues, was the Treasury Back Office team leader.

“She was the team leader and had greater responsibilities in that role,” the judgement states.

KSh9.78 Million Blow

The dismissal victory was not Bank of Africa’s only success.

The bank also pursued Wachira over outstanding staff loans granted during employment.

Those loans initially carried preferential rates available to bank employees.

After her dismissal, the bank shifted the facility to commercial interest rates.

Wachira challenged that decision alongside the termination itself.

The court rejected her challenge after finding the dismissal lawful.

It held that employment-linked benefits cease when employment lawfully ends.

The court also found it had jurisdiction over the loan dispute.

That finding cleared the way for Bank of Africa’s counterclaim.

The bank ultimately sought KSh9,780,390.58 as the outstanding balance.

The court allowed that counterclaim as calculated on September 23, 2022.

It further allowed recovery of any remaining balance with accrued interest.

The bank was also awarded costs relating to the counterclaim.

Wachira’s own financial claims consequently collapsed.

She had sought KSh2.424 million, representing twelve months’ salary compensation.

She also sought KSh404,000 as notice pay and KSh323,200 in severance.

The court rejected all those claims after upholding the dismissal.

READ ALSO: Vimal Shah: Bidco Boss Reveals How Trust Led to KSh102.4m Forex Loss

It also held that severance applies to redundancy, rather than summary dismissal.

The judgement ultimately dismissed Wachira’s claim with costs.

For the former banker, the courtroom journey ended far differently than expected.

She entered court seeking compensation after losing her banking career.

She left facing a KSh9.78 million debt judgement against her.

The ruling also underscores the heightened responsibilities carried by banking professionals.

For employees handling large financial transactions, verification remains a critical contractual duty.

In Wachira’s case, the court found that duty had not been adequately discharged.

PAY ATTENTION: Reach us at info@gotta.news.