The Makini School has been ordered to pay Sh 600,000 as damages for expelling two minors from the school in 2023.
Justice Lawrence Mugambi declared that the manner in which the school, through its agent treated the minors following the decision to terminate their contract with the minors’ father violated their inherent dignity under article 28 and their mental and psychological well-being of article 29 (d) of the constitution.
“It is clear to me the treatment that the respondents subjected the minors to was unwarranted and disrespectful and an affront to their dignity,” Justice Mugambi ruled.
The then grade 3 and 4 siblings were expelled from the school after the school terminated its contract with the father who was the PTA Chairman at the time.
According to an affidavit by the minors’ mother, the abrupt decision to expel them greatly affected their well being.
It was her testimony that the decision to expel them had caused them psychological anguish to an extent of one of them bed wetting.
“Following the experience of my two minor children in grade 3 and 4 respectively at Makini school, they have been withdrawn, exhibiting lack of sleep and one of them bed wetting,” the mother said.
She added that the two minors have been attended to at the hospital and were diagnosed with conversion syndrome which affects how their brain works and nocturnal enuresis (bed wetting) as a result of psychological stress.
The judge ruled that as proved by the medical notes, the decision impacted on the minors’ psychological well-being thus found that Makini School violated their rights under article 28 and 29 (d) of the constitution.
The respondents in the matter are Makini School, Horace Mpanza (the school’s regional managing director) Catherine Njuguna (Head Teacher) and Gary Wagner.
The petitioners deponed that on 13th and 14th July 2023, the minors were expelled from their class by the Head Teacher under the instructions of Mpanza.
The letter issued to the minors for their parents stated that the school was terminating their educational contractual relationship.
Further, 1st respondent thereafter on 18th July 2023 refunded Sh 119,700 as the pro-rated tuition fees for the minors in view of their expulsion. Additionally, the petitioners’ counsel vide an email communication dated 13th July 2023 from the school’s counsel was instructed to advise the minors mother to cease sending the minors to the school.
It was the petitioners’ argument that that the minors were expelled from the school solely on the basis of their father’s role as the Chairperson of the PTA and his issues with the School and Mpanza.
The court heard that on 16th June 2023, the school, through a circular notice dated 8th July 2023 called for the Annual General Meeting (AGM) set for 8th July 2023.
In addition to the agenda that was circulated with the notice, the meeting was set to discuss issues pertaining to the students’ welfare and teachers’ high turnover.
Court documents stated that the teachers’ high turnover was due to Mpanza’s aggressive behaviour at the school.
The Regional Managing Director was accused of carrying a firearm in school and smoking in the presence of the students.
However, in a further counter notice dated 7th July 2023, the Head Teacher Ms Njuguna issued a letter purporting to cancel the scheduled AGM meeting.
In their response, the respondents told the court that they terminated the contract with the minors’ father, on 7th July 2023 because he was allegedly harassing and intimidating the staff and principals through misleading information regarding the operations of the school.
Additionally, they accused the minors’ father of overstaying in his position as he has continued to serve as the PTA’s chairman since 2019 yet the PTA constitution only stipulates a 3-year term.
In his affidavit , Mpanza deponed that the minors’ tenure as students at Makini was exclusively based on the private contractual agreement between the school and their father, and its Rules and conditions.
It is asserted that the minors father agreed to the terms prior to the enrollment of the minors in the school.
According to the Head Teacher, the fact of existence of contractual relationship does not give the minors an absolute right to education in the school.
