Parent sues school, headteacher for suspending girl in Airbnb saga

On July 3, 2026, Hospital Hill Comprehensive School management sent home a Grade Eight student and asked her mother to take her for counselling at a government-owned institution and return to school on July 20.

 The school’s head teacher said the student was suspended for allegedly booking an Airbnb during the school mid-term break and was seen with a male learner.

However, the decision has turned into a full-blown court battle, with the minor’s mother, whom we codename Janet for ethical purposes, accusing the school management of invading her privacy and making false accusations.

In her case against the school, the head teacher, and the chair of the Board of Management and the Teachers Service Commission (TSC), Janet argued that she was aware of her daughter’s whereabouts during the break.

She told the court that a teacher illegally gained access to the girl’s Instagram account during the course of the institution’s investigations.

Janet also cited the office of the Data Protection Commissioner and the Commission on Administrative Justice (CAJ) as interested parties.

“The impugned suspension was founded upon allegations that the minor had associated with a male learner and had booked and or attended an Airbnb during the official school mid- term break. The petitioner states that the allegations are false, baseless and unsupported by any credible evidence, and that the respondents ignored material information demonstrating that the minor remained under her parents' custody, supervision and express authorization throughout the material period,” she claimed.

Janet asserted that her daughter has been well-behaved since she joined the institution in 2017.

She expressed shock that the management had commenced a disciplinary process and suspended the student over false allegations.

Janet claimed that her daughter remained under her watch throughout the midterm.

She told the court that her daughter informed her that she would attend her friend’s birthday where learners from different schools were expected to be present.

Janet further stated that on June 26, the student went to school to participate in the Kenya Music Festival rehearsals.

“At no point whatsoever did the minor rent, visit or set foot in any Airbnb premises, nor did she pair up with a male learner as was alleged by the Respondents in the suspension letter dated July 3, 2026, the said allegations being false, baseless and wholly inconsistent with the true facts,” argued Janet.

She stated that the school teacher called her at around 2.11 pm, to inquire about her daughter’s whereabouts.

 “I confirmed that I was fully aware of the minor's whereabouts and her movements had my full knowledge, authority and approval. Following the said conversation, I continued monitoring the minor's movements and ensured that she travelled safely from the school to Ngara by means of an Uber transport service and thereafter from Ngara to our residence through a separate Uber ride,” she said, adding that the digital hailing application receipts were evidence to disapprove the claims.

Janet also took issue with the school teacher’s decision to allegedly access her daughter’s social media account for investigations.

She said that her daughter informed her that the teacher had forced her to log into her Instagram and had inspected the contents.

She argued that the teacher was required to seek consent from her, and inform her of any move he was taking.

Janet asserted that there was no school law or requirement that teachers had the authority to access students’ private accounts.

Janet claimed that she was not called for any meaningful disciplinary hearing before a decision was made, nor was her daughter allowed to rebut the allegations against her.

She argued that the student, who ought to sit for national examinations this year, was condemned unheard for something she had allegedly not done.

“ The suspension letter further directed that the minor would only be readmitted to school upon undergoing counselling, yet it failed to specify the duration of such counselling, the qualifications of the counsellor, the report required to be furnished, or whether I, as the parent and legal guardian, was required to participate in the counselling process. I verily believe that the said directive was vague, uncertain and incapable of implementation, thereby leaving the minor's return to school entirely at the discretion of the respondents,” she argued.