[2012] KEELRC 238 (KLR)

[2012] KEELRC 238 (KLR)

The court found that the claimant's employment commenced in January 2005 on an oral contract at a monthly salary of Kshs.12,000, as the respondent failed to produce admissible evidence to the contrary. The respondent's documentary evidence was inadmissible due to lack of proper authentication and production by a...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2012] KEELRC 238 (KLR)
Parties
Claimant: Omae Joshua Ondieki; Respondent: Gothic Investiment Ltd t/a Osteria Group of Hotels
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Cause 361 of 2011
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Judgment
Outcome
claim allowed in part
Judges
AN Makau
Legal Topics
Unfair Termination, Summary Dismissal, Terminal Benefits, Oral Contracts, Admissibility of Evidence
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Unfair Termination Summary Dismissal Terminal Benefits Oral Contracts Admissibility of Evidence

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

Parties

Omae Joshua Ondieki

Claimant

Gothic Investiment Ltd t/a Osteria Group of Hotels

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Cause / Judgment

  1. 1 When did the employment contract between the parties commence?
  2. 2 What was the salary payable to the claimant as at the date of dismissal?
  3. 3 Whether the summary dismissal of the claimant from service was unfair and unlawful?

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the claimant's employment commenced in January 2005 on an oral contract at a monthly salary of Kshs.12,000, as the respondent failed to produce admissible evidence to the contrary. The respondent's documentary evidence was inadmissible due to lack of proper authentication and production by a competent witness. The court held that the summary dismissal was unfair and unlawful because the claimant was not given a hearing and no evidence of misconduct was presented. The respondent failed to discharge the burden of proof for lawful dismissal. The claimant was entitled to terminal benefits for salary arrears, leave pay, service pay, and compensation for unfair termination,...

Court Disposition

claim allowed in part

Orders

  • The claimant is awarded Kshs.12,000 for April 2010 salary.
  • The claimant is awarded Kshs.48,000 as leave pay.