[2016] KEELRC 1044 (KLR)
The claimant failed to provide sufficient evidence to establish the existence of an employment relationship with the respondent, such as a letter of appointment, payslip, or staff card. The claimant also failed to produce a resignation letter or proof of payment upon resignation. The absence of documentary evidence...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2016] KEELRC 1044 (KLR)
- Parties
- Claimant: Nicholus Kipkemoi Korir; Respondent: Hatari Security Guards Limited
- Court
- Employment and Labour Relations Court
- Court Station
- Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Cause 1840 of 2015
- Procedural Posture
- Employment Cause / Judgment
- Outcome
- claim dismissed with costs
- Judges
- NJ Abuodha
- Legal Topics
- Burden of Proof, Unfair Termination, Wrongful Dismissal, Employment Relationship, Evidence Requirements
- 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
Nicholus Kipkemoi Korir
Claimant
Hatari Security Guards Limited
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the claimant proved the existence of an employment relationship with the respondent.
- 2 Whether the claimant established unfair termination or wrongful dismissal.
- 3 Whether the claimant is entitled to any remedies sought.
Ratio Decidendi
The claimant failed to provide sufficient evidence to establish the existence of an employment relationship with the respondent, such as a letter of appointment, payslip, or staff card. The claimant also failed to produce a resignation letter or proof of payment upon resignation. The absence of documentary evidence meant that the claimant did not discharge the burden of proof required in civil claims and under section 47(5) of the Employment Act. The court held that mere allegations, unsupported by evidence, are insufficient to warrant a finding in the claimant's favor, even where the respondent has not defended the claim. Consequently, the claim was dismissed for lack of proof.
Court Disposition
claim dismissed with costs
Orders
- The claim is dismissed with costs to the respondent.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
25 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE EMPLOYMENT AND LABOUR RELATIONS COURT
AT NAIROBI
CAUSE NUMBER 1840 OF 2015
NICHOLUS KIPKEMOI KORIR………………………………….CLAIMANT
VERSUS
HATARI SECURITY GUARDS LIMITED………………….RESPONDENT
JUDGMENT
1. The claim proceeded ex parte after the Court became convinced that the respondent was served and entered appearance but failed to file a response to the claim.
2. In his evidence before Court, the claimant stated that he was employed by the respondent as a guard on 5th July, 2010. He was not issued with a letter of appointment. His salary per month was Kshs.7,600/=. According to him, he was forced to resign after he continued reporting to the office but was never allocated duties. It was his evidence that in 2011 at Muthaiga he was attacked and seriously injured by thugs while on duty. He was taken to hospital and admitted for six days.
3. The doctor thereafter gave him three months off but he only stayed for one month. He decided to go back to work because the respondent was not paying him regularly when he was on sick off. He further stated that he was paid some Kshs.19,.949/= upon resignation which he had no idea what it was for. The claimant did not exhibit a copy of his resignation letter either in his pleadings or in Court during the hearing.
4. The settled rule in all civil claims is that a party who intends a Court to find or decide any matter in his or her favour must prove the allegations to the required standard of proof in civil claims which is on a balance of probability. Further under section 47(5) of the Employment Act in any complaint of unfair termination or wrongful dismissal the burden of proving that an unfair termination of employment or wrongful dismissal has occurred shall rest on the employee, while the burden of justifying the grounds for termination or wrongful dismissal shall rest on the employer.
5. This burden of proof does not become any less on the employee simply because the employer has not defended the claim or absent at the trial. The claimant must still prove his or her case. It is therefore not enough for the employee to simply make allegations on oath or in the pleadings, which are not backed by any evidence and expect the Court to find in his or her favour.
6. The claimant herein alleges he was employed by the respondent but has produced nothing to establish that there indeed existed employer-employee relationship between him and the respondent. It may well be that he was never issued with a letter of appointment but some form evidence such as payslip or staff card could have sufficed. He alleges that he resigned from the respondent and was paid Kshs.19,949/= which he had no idea what it was for but neither produces the resignation letter nor payslip to show he was paid any such money by the respondent.
In the circumstances, the Court finds that the claimant has failed to prove his claim to the required standards and dismisses the same with costs.
7. It is so ordered.
Dated at Nairobi this 17th day of June 2016
Abuodha Jorum Nelson
Judge
Delivered this 17th day of June 2016
In the presence of:-
……………………………………………………………for the Claimant and
………………………………………………………………for the Respondent.
Abuodha Jorum Nelson
Judge