[2018] KEELRC 2365 (KLR)

[2018] KEELRC 2365 (KLR)

The court found that the claimant failed to prove, on a balance of probabilities, that he was entitled to the claimed dues. The assertion that he worked every day, including Sundays and public holidays, without a break was found to be implausible and unsupported by evidence. The claimant did not provide the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] KEELRC 2365 (KLR)
Parties
Claimant: Lazaro W. Wanyonyi; Respondent: Night Armour Security Services
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Suit 1676 of 2014
Procedural Posture
Employment Claim / Judgment
Outcome
claim dismissed
Judges
AN Makau, MSA Makhandia
Legal Topics
Unlawful Termination, Minimum Wage, Overtime Pay, Leave Entitlement
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Unlawful Termination Minimum Wage Overtime Pay Leave Entitlement

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

Lazaro W. Wanyonyi

Claimant

Night Armour Security Services

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Claim / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the claimant was unlawfully dismissed without notice contrary to Section 41 of the Employment Act.
  2. 2 Whether the claimant was underpaid below the gazetted minimum wage for security guards.
  3. 3 Whether the claimant is entitled to compensation for overtime, leave, severance pay, and other terminal dues.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the claimant failed to prove, on a balance of probabilities, that he was entitled to the claimed dues. The assertion that he worked every day, including Sundays and public holidays, without a break was found to be implausible and unsupported by evidence. The claimant did not provide the applicable wage rates to substantiate the claim of underpayment. As a result, the court dismissed the entire claim for lack of proof, holding that the burden of proof rested with the claimant, who failed to discharge it.

Court Disposition

claim dismissed

Orders

  • The claimant's entire claim is dismissed.
  • There is no order as to costs.