[2022] KEELRC 14699 (KLR)

[2022] KEELRC 14699 (KLR)

The court found that the respondent failed to discharge the statutory burden of proof under section 43 of the Employment Act to justify the termination of the claimants' employment. The respondent did not provide evidence of any effort to contact the claimants or require them to show cause for alleged abscondment....

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2022] KEELRC 14699 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Daniel Maru Chacha; Applicant: Solomon Wanyama Alaba; Applicant: Boniface Odemo Lisusa; Respondent: Santram Hardware
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Eldoret
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Case 237 of 2018
Procedural Posture
Employment Claim / Judgment
Outcome
Claim partly allowed; claimants awarded notice pay and compensation for unfair termination.
Legal Topics
Unfair Termination, Casual Employment, Notice Pay, Compensation for Termination, Burden of Proof, Overtime Claims
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Unfair Termination Casual Employment Notice Pay Compensation for Termination Burden of Proof Overtime Claims

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Daniel Maru Chacha

Applicant

Solomon Wanyama Alaba

Applicant

Boniface Odemo Lisusa

Applicant

Santram Hardware

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Claim / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the claimants were unfairly terminated from employment by the respondent.
  2. 2 Whether the claimants are entitled to payment in lieu of notice and compensation for unfair termination.
  3. 3 Whether the claimants were underpaid or entitled to overtime pay.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the respondent failed to discharge the statutory burden of proof under section 43 of the Employment Act to justify the termination of the claimants' employment. The respondent did not provide evidence of any effort to contact the claimants or require them to show cause for alleged abscondment. The claimants were therefore deemed to have been unfairly terminated. The court also found that while the claimants alleged overtime and underpayment, they did not provide sufficient evidence to substantiate these claims. As a result, the court awarded each claimant one month's salary in lieu of notice and four months' salary as compensation for unfair termination, but declined...

Court Disposition

Claim partly allowed; claimants awarded notice pay and compensation for unfair termination.

Orders

  • Each claimant is awarded one month's salary in lieu of notice (Kshs 10,107).
  • Each claimant is awarded four months' salary as compensation for unfair termination (Kshs 40,428).