[2017] KEELRC 860 (KLR)

[2017] KEELRC 860 (KLR)

The court found that the claimant failed to prove, on a balance of probabilities, that she was unfairly terminated by the respondent. The evidence showed that the claimant went on leave and did not report back to work, and there was insufficient proof of dismissal by the employer. The payment of Kshs. 20,000/- at...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2017] KEELRC 860 (KLR)
Parties
Claimant: Maximila Bushuru; Respondent: Anvi Emporium Limited
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Kisumu
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Cause 352 of 2014
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Judgment
Outcome
Claim partly allowed for underpayments; all other claims dismissed.
Judges
DO Ogal
Legal Topics
Unfair Termination, Underpayment of Wages, Annual Leave Entitlement, Service Gratuity, Maternity Leave, Statutory Minimum Wage
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Unfair Termination Underpayment of Wages Annual Leave Entitlement Service Gratuity Maternity Leave Statutory Minimum Wage

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 5 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Maximila Bushuru

Claimant

Anvi Emporium Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Cause / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the claimant was unfairly terminated from employment by the respondent.
  2. 2 Whether the claimant is entitled to terminal dues including underpayments, leave, service gratuity, and compensation.
  3. 3 Whether the payment of Kshs. 20,000/- by the respondent constituted full and final settlement of the claim.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the claimant failed to prove, on a balance of probabilities, that she was unfairly terminated by the respondent. The evidence showed that the claimant went on leave and did not report back to work, and there was insufficient proof of dismissal by the employer. The payment of Kshs. 20,000/- at the Labour Office was deemed to cover notice and leave, not the underpayments claimed. The court determined that the claimant was underpaid throughout her employment, as her salary was below the statutory minimum wage for a shop assistant, including house allowance. The claims for service gratuity, annual leave, unpaid maternity leave, and compensation for unfair dismissal were...

Court Disposition

Claim partly allowed for underpayments; all other claims dismissed.

Orders

  • Judgment entered for the claimant against the respondent in the sum of Kshs. 144,518.75 for underpayments.
  • No order as to costs.