[2022] KEELRC 12903 (KLR)
The court found that both parties failed to present competent pleadings or sufficient evidence to enable the court to discern the actual dispute and make specific findings. The claimant did not specify the employees on whose behalf the claim was brought, nor did it attach any payslips or evidence of underpayment....
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2022] KEELRC 12903 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Kenya National Private Security Workers Union; Respondent: Group Nine Security
- Court
- Employment and Labour Relations Court
- Court Station
- Employment and Labour Relations Court at Eldoret
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Cause 288 of 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Employment Cause / Judgment
- Outcome
- claim struck out as incompetent
- Judges
- NJ Abuodha
- Legal Topics
- Minimum Wage Disputes, Overtime Pay, Public Holiday Entitlements, Leave Travel Allowance
- 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
Kenya National Private Security Workers Union
Applicant
Group Nine Security
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the respondent paid its workers below the recommended minimum wage.
- 2 Whether the respondent failed to pay overtime and public holiday pay to its workers.
- 3 Whether the claimant's pleadings were competent and supported by evidence.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that both parties failed to present competent pleadings or sufficient evidence to enable the court to discern the actual dispute and make specific findings. The claimant did not specify the employees on whose behalf the claim was brought, nor did it attach any payslips or evidence of underpayment. The respondent's response was unrelated to the allegations in the statement of claim. As a result, the court concluded that the claim was incompetent and could not be determined on its merits.
Court Disposition
claim struck out as incompetent
Orders
- The claim is struck out as incompetent.
- There is no order as to costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
22 paragraphs
Kenya National Private Security Workers Union v Group Nine Security (Cause 288 of 2017) [2022] KEELRC 12903 (KLR) (14 October 2022) (Judgment)
Neutral citation: [2022] KEELRC 12903 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Employment and Labour Relations Court at Eldoret
Cause 288 of 2017
NJ Abuodha, J
October 14, 2022
Between
Kenya National Private Security Workers Union
Claimant
and
Group Nine Security
Respondent
Judgment
1. Through a memorandum of claim filed on October 11, 2016 the claimant herein alleged among others that the respondent is one of the major employers in the Security Industry in Kenya and the disagreement was recorded after the respondent failed to cooperate with the conciliator. The matter was reported to the Minister and parties were unable to agree over the dispute.
2. According to the claimant, employees of the respondent have severally complained to the claimant’s offices concerning grievances they have with the respondent and further that the claimant’s efforts to bring the respondent on board to discuss the issues of concern have failed after the respondent failed to respond to the letters from the claimant.
3. The claimant complained that their efforts in writing to the respondent over low pay, refusal to pay overtime to its workers, public holidays, leave travelling allowance have not got any positive response.
4. The respondent entered appearance and filed their response on January 23, 2017 which in the court’s view does not seem to relate to the allegations raised by the claimant. The respondent makes reference to a claimant employed earning a salary of Ksh.5000/= per month which was subsequently increased to Ksh.6,000/= yet there was no such allegation in the claimant’s statement of claim. The statement of response is totally misplaced and or misaligned to the allegations contained in the statement of claim and appeared to have been responding to a totally different statement of claim which was not before the court.
5. The court observes that both parties failed to bring forward competent pleadings to enable the court discern the dispute and make any specific finding. For instance, the claimant alleges the respondent paid its workers below the recommended minimum wage, never paid overtime and public holidays yet never specified the grievants on whose behalf the claim was brought, never attached a single payslip to demonstrate the salary paid by the respondent to compare with the gazette minimum wage in order to see if indeed there was underpayment.
6. In conclusion the court has no option but to strike out the claim as incompetent but with no order as to costs.
7. It is so ordered.
DATED AND DELIVERED AT ELDORET THIS 14THDAY OF OCTOBER, 2022ABUODHA NELSON JORUMJUDGE ELRC