[2020] KEELRC 42 (KLR)

[2020] KEELRC 42 (KLR)

The court found that the Claimant union lacked locus standi as it did not represent a simple majority of unionisable employees and had no recognition agreement with the Respondent. The Grievant, Silas Njeru, failed to provide sufficient evidence to prove non-payment of salaries and underpayment, as bank statements...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2020] KEELRC 42 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Kenya Union of Commercial, Food & Allied Workers; Respondent: Nyambene Coffee Mills
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Cause 18 of 2018
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Judgment
Outcome
claim dismissed
Judges
AN Makau
Legal Topics
Unlawful Termination, Underpayment of Wages, Trade Union Representation, Proof of Employment, Procedural Fairness
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Unlawful Termination Underpayment of Wages Trade Union Representation Proof of Employment Procedural Fairness

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kenya Union of Commercial, Food & Allied Workers

Applicant

Nyambene Coffee Mills

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Cause / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the Grievant was unlawfully terminated from employment by the Respondent.
  2. 2 Whether the Grievant was underpaid and denied statutory benefits during his employment.
  3. 3 Whether the Claimant union had locus standi to file the suit on behalf of the Grievant.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the Claimant union lacked locus standi as it did not represent a simple majority of unionisable employees and had no recognition agreement with the Respondent. The Grievant, Silas Njeru, failed to provide sufficient evidence to prove non-payment of salaries and underpayment, as bank statements showed salary payments by the Respondent until April 2015 and by another company thereafter. The claim for underpayments was unsupported by the relevant wage orders. Consequently, the Claimant failed to prove the case on a balance of probabilities, and the claim was dismissed.

Court Disposition

claim dismissed

Orders

  • The claim is dismissed with no orders as to costs.
  • The names of the 2nd and 3rd Respondents are struck out from the suit.