[2018] KEELRC 1616 (KLR)

[2018] KEELRC 1616 (KLR)

The court found that the claimants failed to prove underpayment as they did not specify the rates they were entitled to or provide sufficient evidence to support the sums claimed. The claim for overtime/lost hours was dismissed because time sheets and payslips showed that overtime was properly recorded and paid...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] KEELRC 1616 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Douglas Wanjala Makokha & 35 Others; Respondent: Jiangxi Zhongmei Engineering Construction Company Limited
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Kisumu
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Cause 15 of 2015
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Judgment
Outcome
Judgment for claimants in respect of annual leave only; all other claims dismissed.
Judges
DO Ogal, MN Nduma
Legal Topics
Statutory Minimum Wage, Overtime Entitlements, Annual Leave Entitlement, Burden of Proof, Statutory Deductions
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Statutory Minimum Wage Overtime Entitlements Annual Leave Entitlement Burden of Proof Statutory Deductions

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 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Douglas Wanjala Makokha & 35 Others

Applicant

Jiangxi Zhongmei Engineering Construction Company Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Cause / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the claimants were underpaid in violation of statutory minimum wage requirements.
  2. 2 Whether the claimants are owed overtime/lost hours compensation.
  3. 3 Whether the claimants are entitled to payment for annual leave not taken.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the claimants failed to prove underpayment as they did not specify the rates they were entitled to or provide sufficient evidence to support the sums claimed. The claim for overtime/lost hours was dismissed because time sheets and payslips showed that overtime was properly recorded and paid according to statutory requirements. However, the respondent did not deny that annual leave was not paid, and under Section 28 of the Employment Act, all claimants who worked more than two months are entitled to annual leave at 1.75 days per month worked. Judgment was therefore entered for the claimants for annual leave only, with all other claims dismissed for want of proof.

Court Disposition

Judgment for claimants in respect of annual leave only; all other claims dismissed.

Orders

  • Respondent to compute and pay claimants all annual leave due from date of recruitment to date of leaving employment or to date of filing suit, being December 2014.
  • Respondent to pay costs of the suit at half rate on the lower scale.