Trade Secret Detail

Trade Secret

Erastus Chege Mwangi v Kenya Railways Corporation (Cause 637 of 2019) [2022] KEELRC 966 (KLR) (27 January 2022) (Judgment)

Parties
Erastus Chege Mwangi v Kenya Railways Corporation
Court
The Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
Bench
Justice Dr. Jacob Gakeri
Tags
Confidential information Breach of confidence
Date
2026-08-26

Facts

Mwangi, a Principal Land Surveyor, discovered during a site visit for the Standard Gauge Railway Phase 2A land-acquisition process that a parcel proposed for compensation by the National Land Commission was not actually affected by the project. He briefed his superiors and separately contacted the Commission to flag this. Kenya Railways charged him with gross misconduct for sharing unauthorised information with the public, interdicted him, and later terminated his employment.

Issues

Whether disclosure to the National Land Commission of land-compensation information amounted to unauthorised disclosure of the employer's confidential information constituting a valid ground for dismissal, and whether the dismissal was substantively and procedurally fair.

Rule

Employment Act ss.41, 45, 49; Access to Information Act 2016 s.16 (public-interest disclosure); Constitution of Kenya 2010, Article 67 (National Land Commission); Walter Ogal Anuro v Teachers Service Commission [2013] eKLR and related precedents on substantive and procedural fairness.

Analysis

The court found the employer's HR Manual nowhere defined confidential information and led no evidence the disclosed information was in fact confidential. The Commission, a constitutional body and project partner, was not "the public", and the Manual itself permitted disclosure to persons connected with the Corporation in the course of duty. Disclosure of public land-compensation information in the public interest was protected under s.16 of the Access to Information Act, no harm to the project was shown, and the information was not a trade secret.

Conclusion

Termination declared substantively unfair, though procedurally compliant; the court awarded six months' gross salary compensation, unpaid dues, leave payment and a certificate of service. Reinstatement and most other claims were rejected.

Judgement available at kenyalaw.org.

Frequently Asked Questions

Frequently Asked Questions

The IP Case Law Database is a repository of case briefs summarising rulings and judgments related to intellectual property law in Kenya. It covers various types of IP, including copyrights, trademarks, patents, and more.

The database is open to legal practitioners, researchers, scholars, and students interested in the field of intellectual property law in Kenya. It is designed to be a useful tool for anyone seeking to understand the legal precedents that shape IP law in the country.

The database features cases across all areas of intellectual property law, including copyright infringement, trademark disputes, patent issues, and cases involving industrial designs and utility models. It also includes cases related to collective management organisations and royalty collection.

We aim to update the database regularly to ensure that it contains the latest rulings and judgments. New cases are added as soon as they are available to keep our users informed about the latest developments in IP law.

Yes, the database is fully searchable. You can search by case name, type of intellectual property, legal issue, or court decision. This allows you to quickly find relevant case briefs based on your research needs.

Each case brief includes key details such as the facts of the case, the legal issues at hand, the court’s ruling, and a summary of the legal analysis. This structure helps users quickly understand the critical points of each ruling.

In addition to the case briefs, we provide links to full-text judgments where available. This ensures that users can access the complete legal reasoning and details if they need more in-depth information.

To cite cases from our database, you should follow standard legal citation practices. Each case brief includes the official case reference, making it easy to include in your legal documents or research papers.

At this time, the database is curated by legal experts and researchers. However, we welcome suggestions for cases to include or features to improve the platform. Please contact us through our support page if you have feedback or suggestions.