A judge has upheld the sacking of a former manager at Bank of Africa (BOA), saying she had been negligent in carrying out her duties, even as the lender claimed that her actions had exposed it to huge operational and financial risks.
Irene Wambura Njuki, the manager of global operations, was fired in May 2020 for gross misconduct after it was discovered that she had erroneously paid out money totalling $88,000 (approximately Sh11.3 million) on two occasions.
And although the money was reversed, Justice Christine Baari said in a judgment on June 12, 2025 that it was immaterial, given the lapses in her work.
“The evidence herein, points to the claimant’s (Wambura) negligence in the way she carried out her duties, first in the lapses in approving the incorrect amounts and secondly, the unexplained delays in raising risk events to mitigate the incidents,” said the judge.
The Employment and Labour Relations Court judge said her termination was justifiable, reasonable and fair.
The lender said on March 30, 2020 and April 1, 2020, the former manager incorrectly settled the amounts of $199,982 instead of $119,882 and $29,301 instead of $21,301, respectively.
The money was later recalled, but it had the potential to expose the bank to financial losses of $88,000.
BOA said Ms Wambura had admitted during the disciplinary hearing that she had discovered the first error on April 1, 2020, but she reported it on April 9, 2020 – nine days later.
She discovered the second error on April 3, 2020, but reported it six days later.
Ms Wambura said that she performed her job with diligence, honesty and unflappability, earning her a promotion to the position of manager of global operations. In this role, she led various other team leaders from the bank’s trade finance, SWIFT and custodial operations departments.
She submitted that during her employment, she had never been involved in any misconduct or disciplinary action.
She claimed that, in May 2020, the bank had terminated her employment on the grounds of incompetence, consistent misconduct and loss of trust.
She sued the lender, stating that her sacking was unfair as none of the reasons stated for termination related to the grounds given and that they were only a mere ruse to kick her out of the organisation.
She sought to be paid Sh2.9 million for unfair termination.
Ms Wambura maintained that the bank never complained about her work performance.
She said she was invited for a disciplinary hearing to respond to the allegations of validating two transactions to BOA Niger and BOA France and the failure to follow operational procedures in escalating and verifying the errors made.
She argued that, although the bank has a reconciliation unit that checks transactions after completion, it failed to act upon the information made available to it regarding the material issues.
She added that the lender failed to consider the swift actions she took to recover the disputed amounts.
Ms Wambura attributed the breaches to the bank for reducing the number of staff from 11 to six as a Covid-19 precautionary measure, which made it difficult to complete transactions without human error.
She maintained that, upon discovering the errors, she mitigated them by quickly contacting the recipient bank and customer about the excess amounts, which were then returned. Therefore, she said, there was no actual loss incurred by BOA.
But the bank said it had a valid and fair reason for terminating her employment, as the errors were grievous and affected its core business and its fundamental duty of care to its clients as custodians of their funds.
The bank added that Ms Wambura had previously been served with a warning letter on March 21, 2019, for failing to exercise due diligence when validating incoming funds, which resulted in duplication of credit of Sh980,000 to a client’s account.
The judge ruled that the reasons advanced by the bank for terminating her employment were valid and fair, as, in her role as the manager of global operations, Ms Wambura was responsible for managing internal processes, operational excellence and risk management.
“In the premise, I have no difficulty finding the claimant’s termination procedurally fair, which I hereby do,” said the judge.
