[2019] KEELRC 2379 (KLR)

[2019] KEELRC 2379 (KLR)

The court found that the claimant had proved his entitlement to unpaid house allowance, underpayment of wages, annual leave pay, and payment in lieu of notice, as these elements were not factored into his monthly payments and were supported by documentary evidence. The court rejected the claim for overtime due to...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2019] KEELRC 2379 (KLR)
Parties
Claimant: Hirkena Athonto Elemo; Respondent: Jiangxi Zhongmei Engineering Construction Company Limited
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nyeri
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Cause 439A of 2017
Procedural Posture
Employment Claim / Judgment
Outcome
Claim partly allowed. Judgment for the claimant for underpayment, leave pay, notice pay, house allowance, and costs.
Judges
AN Makau
Legal Topics
Unlawful Termination, Underpayment of Wages, House Allowance, Leave Entitlement, Notice Pay
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Unlawful Termination Underpayment of Wages House Allowance Leave Entitlement Notice Pay

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hirkena Athonto Elemo

Claimant

Jiangxi Zhongmei Engineering Construction Company Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Claim / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the claimant was unlawfully terminated from employment.
  2. 2 Whether the claimant was underpaid and denied statutory entitlements such as house allowance, leave pay, and notice pay.
  3. 3 Whether the claimant is entitled to costs and other reliefs sought.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the claimant had proved his entitlement to unpaid house allowance, underpayment of wages, annual leave pay, and payment in lieu of notice, as these elements were not factored into his monthly payments and were supported by documentary evidence. The court rejected the claim for overtime due to lack of specific proof regarding hours worked and dates. The respondent's failure to defend the suit resulted in liability being established, but the claimant still bore the burden of proving the quantum of each claim. The court awarded the sums for underpayment, leave, notice, and house allowance, but not for overtime.

Court Disposition

Claim partly allowed. Judgment for the claimant for underpayment, leave pay, notice pay, house allowance, and costs.

Orders

  • Respondent to pay claimant Kshs. 384,184 for underpayment of wages.
  • Respondent to pay claimant Kshs. 52,166 for annual leave pay.