[2021] KEELRC 642 (KLR)

[2021] KEELRC 642 (KLR)

The court found that the claimant failed to discharge the burden of proof required to establish that he was an employee of the respondent. No documentary evidence, such as a contract of employment, pay records, or corroborating witness testimony, was produced to support the claimant's assertion of continuous...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] KEELRC 642 (KLR)
Parties
Claimant: John Nyakundi; Respondent: Devshibhai & Sons Limited
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nakuru
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Cause 241 of 2016
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Judgment
Outcome
claim dismissed
Judges
HS Wasilwa
Legal Topics
Unfair Termination, Burden of Proof, Employment Relationship, Casual Employment, Entitlement to Benefits
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Unfair Termination Burden of Proof Employment Relationship Casual Employment Entitlement to Benefits

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John Nyakundi

Claimant

Devshibhai & Sons Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Cause / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the claimant was an employee of the respondent entitled to employment benefits.
  2. 2 Whether the claimant was unfairly terminated by the respondent.
  3. 3 Whether the claimant is entitled to notice pay, leave pay, gratuity, and compensation.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the claimant failed to discharge the burden of proof required to establish that he was an employee of the respondent. No documentary evidence, such as a contract of employment, pay records, or corroborating witness testimony, was produced to support the claimant's assertion of continuous employment from 2010 to 2015. The respondent's evidence, including muster rolls and petty cash vouchers, indicated that the claimant was engaged as an independent contractor for a limited period in 2012. In the absence of credible evidence of an employment relationship, the court held that the claim for unfair termination and related benefits could not be sustained. Consequently, the...

Court Disposition

claim dismissed

Orders

  • The claim is dismissed with no order as to costs.