Harriet Arangi Were said she refused requests to use clinic funds for Nairobi Chapel before her departure.
A resignation that appeared voluntary on paper has been declared a dismissal in substance.
The Employment and Labour Relations Court ruled that Nairobi Chapel constructively dismissed former Social Justice Director Harriet Arangi Were.
Justice Monica Mbarũ found that the church’s conduct effectively made continued employment untenable.
The ruling also exposed a separate battle over KSh1.875 million withdrawn from Were’s bank account.
NCBA Bank Kenya was ordered to refund the money, with commercial interest running from withdrawal.
The judgement, delivered on August 14, 2026, ends a seven-year dispute involving three respondents.
It involved Nairobi Chapel, NCBA Bank Kenya and Bishop Oscar Muriu.
At its heart, however, was one deceptively simple question: Did Were really resign?
The court’s answer was emphatic: not in the circumstances surrounding her departure.
A Troubled Exit
Were joined Nairobi Chapel in 2013 as its Director of Social Justice.
She earned KSh230,000 monthly and also oversaw Mwangaza Ulio Tumaini Clinic in Korogocho.
The trouble began in 2019 when Nairobi Chapel lost donor funding.
The church acknowledged experiencing financial difficulties that affected its ability to pay salaries.
Were, however, said an audit showed the clinic remained profitable and financially sound.
She alleged that church officials wanted clinic proceeds used to support Nairobi Chapel.
According to her evidence, she refused because established financial procedures would be breached.
She subsequently raised her concerns with Bishop Oscar Muriu.
On September 7, 2019, Muriu told her the church intended terminating her employment.
The news, she said, left her distressed and contributed to health complications.
Were later resigned, giving one month’s notice, with employment ending September 30.
But the court found that resignation could not be examined in isolation.
Nairobi Chapel accepted her departure and offered a package containing several benefits.
These included medical cover, pension benefits, her laptop and a certificate of service.
The church also promised an ex gratia payment, although it initially specified no amount.
Muriu’s testimony proved particularly damaging to the church’s position.
He acknowledged advising Were to resign for a “soft landing” and help with her loans.
That phrase became important because it suggested resignation was being actively encouraged.
The court also noted that Were’s position was filled soon after her departure.
Those circumstances changed the legal character of what happened.
The Dismissal
Constructive dismissal was the central issue before Justice Mbarũ.
It arises where an employer seriously breaches the employment relationship.
The breach must be sufficiently serious to show continued employment cannot reasonably continue.
An employee may then leave because the employer’s conduct effectively leaves no viable alternative.
The court relied on established Kenyan authorities defining that principle.
One of them was Coca Cola East & Central Africa Limited v Maria Kagai Ligaga.
Another was Leena Apparels (EPZ) Limited v Nyevu Juma Ndokolani.
Those decisions place the employer’s conduct at the centre of the inquiry.
The question therefore was not simply whether Were submitted resignation.
The question was why she resigned and what the employer had done beforehand.
Justice Mbaru found the circumstances compelling.
Nairobi Chapel had presented the programme as financially troubled and encouraged Were to leave.
Yet the position was filled shortly after she departed.
That, the court reasoned, weakened the argument that her departure was purely voluntary.
If genuine operational difficulties existed, the church had another lawful route available.
It could have declared the position redundant and followed the statutory process.
Instead, the circumstances effectively encouraged Were to resign.
The judge described that conduct as nothing less than constructive dismissal.
The ruling therefore rejected Nairobi Chapel’s argument that resignation settled everything.
A signed resignation letter, the judgement makes clear, cannot conceal coercive circumstances.
That finding carries significance beyond this particular church and employee.
Employers facing financial difficulties cannot simply encourage employees to resign.
They must still comply with the legal protections governing termination.
The KSh3.75 Million
The employment dispute then collided with a banking controversy.
On October 3, 2019, Nairobi Chapel deposited KSh3.75 million into Were’s account.
The money arrived through two identical transfers of KSh1.875 million.
Were believed both payments formed part of her negotiated farewell package.
She quickly used the money to settle substantial financial obligations.
What’s more, she paid KSh1 million toward personal and vehicle loans.
She also paid approximately KSh2 million toward her mortgage.
Then Nairobi Chapel said one payment had been made accidentally.
Its accountant demanded that Were return KSh1.875 million.
The church subsequently instructed NCBA to recover the disputed payment.
NCBA reversed the money from Were’s account without first engaging her.
That action left her account overdrawn and generated another legal battle.
The bank later counterclaimed for KSh1.681 million plus commercial interest.
But the court rejected that claim.
Once the money had entered Were’s account, NCBA owed her a duty of care.
The bank could not simply remove funds without properly dealing with its customer.
Justice Mbarũ found that conduct breached Were’s right to information and protection.
The resulting loss, the court held, could not fairly be transferred onto Were.
NCBA must therefore refund the KSh1.875 million, plus commercial interest.
The Verdict
Were won the central employment battle but not every remedy she sought.
The court awarded her KSh423,000 for constructive dismissal.
It also awarded KSh141,000 in payment instead of notice.
Her claims for service pay and leave allowance were rejected.
Service pay was not part of her employment contract, while accrued leave remained unproved.
The court also rejected the respondents’ counterclaims against her.
Nairobi Chapel had accused Were of retaining clinic assets after leaving employment.
These allegedly included bank accounts, cheque books, MPesa accounts and financial records.
The court agreed that those assets belonged to Nairobi Chapel and should be returned.
However, the church had failed to quantify any financial loss caused by their retention.
Were was therefore ordered to return whatever remained within 14 days.
The respondents’ counterclaims were dismissed, while Were received costs.
The final judgement leaves three distinct lessons.
Financial hardship does not automatically justify pushing employees toward resignation.
A resignation can become a dismissal when circumstances effectively force the employee out.
And a bank’s accounting mistake cannot justify casually reaching into a customer’s account.
For Were, the resignation letter that initially marked the end of her employment has now taken on a new significance.
In the eyes of the court, it was the final act of a constructive dismissal.
PAY ATTENTION: Reach us at info@gotta.news.
