[2018] KEELRC 322 (KLR)
The court found that the Claimants failed to produce any documentary evidence to establish that the 2nd to 5th Respondents were Directors of the 1st Respondent or that there was an employment relationship between the Claimants and any of the Respondents. The only evidence was the oral testimony of the 1st Claimant,...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2018] KEELRC 322 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Joseph Kamau Mwangi; Applicant: Nancy Wanjiku Kimondo; Applicant: Mercy Njoki Chege; Applicant: Humphrey Lisamadi Egaba; Applicant: Job Omwando Moega; Applicant: Ronah Wawira Murithi; Applicant: Maureen Amondi Omusi; Applicant: Patricia Kanini Muli; Applicant: Emma Wanjiru Ndungu; Applicant: Joseph Maina Karanja; Applicant: Douglas Murithi Njeru; Respondent: Club Click City; Respondent: Jackson Maina; Respondent: John Njuguna; Respondent: George Gitonga; Respondent: Sammy Gitonga
- Court
- Employment and Labour Relations Court
- Court Station
- Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Cause 1848 of 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Employment Cause / Judgment
- Outcome
- claims dismissed
- Judges
- L Ndolo, DO Ogal
- Legal Topics
- Redundancy, Unlawful Termination, Employment Relationship, Burden of Proof
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Joseph Kamau Mwangi
Applicant
Nancy Wanjiku Kimondo
Applicant
Mercy Njoki Chege
Applicant
Humphrey Lisamadi Egaba
Applicant
Job Omwando Moega
Applicant
Ronah Wawira Murithi
Applicant
Maureen Amondi Omusi
Applicant
Patricia Kanini Muli
Applicant
Emma Wanjiru Ndungu
Applicant
Joseph Maina Karanja
Applicant
Douglas Murithi Njeru
Applicant
Club Click City
Respondent
Jackson Maina
Respondent
John Njuguna
Respondent
George Gitonga
Respondent
Sammy Gitonga
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Claimants were employed by the Respondents as alleged.
- 2 Whether the termination of the Claimants' employment was unlawful and unfair.
- 3 Whether the Claimants are entitled to the reliefs sought.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the Claimants failed to produce any documentary evidence to establish that the 2nd to 5th Respondents were Directors of the 1st Respondent or that there was an employment relationship between the Claimants and any of the Respondents. The only evidence was the oral testimony of the 1st Claimant, which was insufficient to discharge the burden of proof required by law. As a result, the court held that the Claimants had not established their case on a balance of probabilities, and their claims for unlawful termination, redundancy benefits, and other reliefs could not be sustained. The claims were therefore dismissed.
Court Disposition
claims dismissed
Orders
- The Claimants' claims are dismissed.
- There is no order as to costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
54 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE EMPLOYMENT AND LABOUR RELATIONS COURT AT NAIROBI
CAUSE NO 1848 OF 2013
JOSEPH KAMAU MWANGI......................................1ST CLAIMANT
NANCY WANJIKU KIMONDO................................2ND CLAIMANT
MERCY NJOKI CHEGE...........................................3RD CLAIMANT
HUMPHREY LISAMADI EGABA...........................4TH CLAIMANT
JOB OMWANDO MOEGA........................................5TH CLAIMANT
RONAH WAWIRA MURITHI...................................6TH CLAIMANT
MAUREEN AMONDI OMUSI..................................7TH CLAIMANT
PATRICIA KANINI MULI........................................8TH CLAIMANT
EMMA WANJIRU NDUNGU....................................9TH CLAIMANT
JOSEPH MAINA KARANJA..................................10TH CLAIMANT
DOUGLAS MURITHI NJERU................................11TH CLAIMANT
VS
CLUB CLICK CITY...............................................1ST RESPONDENT
JACKSON MAINA................................................2ND RESPONDENT
JOHNNJUGUNA...................................................3RD RESPONDENT
GEORGE GITONGA.............................................4THRESPONDENT
SAMMY GITONGA..............................................5TH RESPONDENT
JUDGMENT
Introduction
1. By a Memorandum of Claim dated 18th November 2013 and filed in court on 20th November 2013, the Claimants have sued the Respondents for unlawful termination of employment. Only the 3rd Respondent entered appearance and filed a Response. At the hearing, there was no representation for the Respondents. The 1st Claimant, Joseph KamauMwangi testified on his own behalf and on behalf of his co-claimants.
The Claimants’ Case
2. The Claimants state that they were employed by the Respondents verbally as Head Cook, Security Bouncer, Waiters, Waitress and Hygiene from 1st July 2009 until 30th September 2013 when their employment was terminated verbally on account of redundancy.
3. The Claimants state that the Respondents failed to pay their salaries for the months of August and September 2013 after closing the business and declaring them redundant.
4. The Claimants’ case is that the termination of their employment on account of redundancy without notice and without benefits was unlawful and unfair.
5. The Claimants claim the cumulative sum of Kshs. 2,977,879 made up of:
a. 12 months’ salary in compensation;
b. 1 month’s salary in lieu of notice;
c. Prorata leave for 1 year;
d. Severance pay for the years worked;
e. Salary for August and September 2013;
f. Salary underpayment for the years worked;
g. House allowance.
6. The Claimants also ask for costs of the case.
The 3rd Respondent’s Case
7. In his Memorandum of Response dated 27th January 2013 and filed in court on 28th January 2013, the 3rdRespondent denies that he had employed any of the Claimants. He further denies terminating their employment or failing to pay their August and September 2013 salaries.
8. The 3rd Respondent therefore avers that he is a stranger to the Claimants’ claims.
Findings and Determination
9. In their Memorandum of Claim, the Claimants plead that they were employed by all the five Respondents. However, in his testimony before the Court, the 1st Claimant, Joseph Kamau Mwangi stated that they were employed by the 1st Respondent in which the 2nd – 5th Respondents were Directors. Mwangi further testified that by the time of filing suit, the 1st Respondent had closed down. They were therefore pursuing their claim against the Directors.
10. In his Memorandum of Response, the 3rd Respondent denied having an employment relationship with the Claimants.
11. The Claimants’ did not produce any documentary evidence to confirm that the 2nd – 5th Respondents were indeed Directors of the 1st Respondent. The result is that the Claimants failed to establish an employment relationship between themselves and the Respondents.
12. The Claimants’ claims are therefore without basis and are dismissed with no order for costs.
13. Orders accordingly.
DATED AND SIGNED AT MOMBASA THIS 17THDAY OF DECEMBER 2018
LINNET NDOLO
JUDGE
DELIVERED AT NAIROBI THIS 20TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2018
MAUREEN ONYANGO
JUDGE
Appearance:
Mr. Kandere for the Claimant
No appearance for the Respondents