[2024] KEELRC 1899 (KLR)
The court found that the respondent's tabulation of Kshs 929,303/- for the period 2007 to 2014 was accurate and that the claimant failed to establish a legal basis for using a colleague's payslip as evidence of underpayment. The court held that each employee's entitlements are determined by their own contract, and...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2024] KEELRC 1899 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Joseph Ongaya Shamwata; Respondent: The Chairman Governing Council Kenya Water Institute
- Court
- Employment and Labour Relations Court
- Court Station
- Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Employment and Labour Relations Cause 2637 of 2016
- Procedural Posture
- Employment and Labour Cause / Post Judgment Ruling on Computation of Award
- Outcome
- Claimant awarded Kshs 929,303/- as computed by the respondent, with interest and costs.
- Judges
- AN Mwaure
- Legal Topics
- Salary Underpayment, Equal Pay, Contractual Entitlements, Interest on Awards
- 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
Joseph Ongaya Shamwata
Applicant
The Chairman Governing Council Kenya Water Institute
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Employment and Labour Cause / Post Judgment Ruling on Computation of Award
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the respondent correctly computed the claimant's underpayment for the period 2012 to 2014.
- 2 Whether the claimant was entitled to rely on a colleague's payslip to establish underpayment.
- 3 Whether the amount tabulated by the respondent is accurate and payable to the claimant.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the respondent's tabulation of Kshs 929,303/- for the period 2007 to 2014 was accurate and that the claimant failed to establish a legal basis for using a colleague's payslip as evidence of underpayment. The court held that each employee's entitlements are determined by their own contract, and the claimant did not demonstrate that his contract was identical to that of the colleague whose payslip he relied upon. Consequently, the court awarded the claimant the sum of Kshs 929,303/- as computed by the respondent, with interest accruing from the date of the ruling until payment in full, and reiterated the earlier order for the respondent to pay the costs of the suit.
Court Disposition
Claimant awarded Kshs 929,303/- as computed by the respondent, with interest and costs.
Orders
- The claimant is awarded Kshs 929,303/-.
- Interest to accrue on the awarded amount from the date of this judgment until full payment at court rates.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
20 paragraphs
Shamwata v Chairman Governing Council Kenya Water Institute (Employment and Labour Relations Cause 2637 of 2016) [2024] KEELRC 1899 (KLR) (18 July 2024) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2024] KEELRC 1899 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
Employment and Labour Relations Cause 2637 of 2016
AN Mwaure, J
July 18, 2024
Between
Joseph Ongaya Shamwata
Petitioner
and
The Chairman Governing Council Kenya Water Institute
Respondent
Ruling
1. The Court delivered its judgment hereto dated 16th February 2024. The court ordered the parties to work out any shortfall between 2012 to 2014 when Petitioner was transferred to the respondent’s employment up to the time of termination of his contract.
2. The claimant says in his submission dated 17th May 2024 that the respondent omitted to calculate the underpayment of 2013 and 2014.
3. He also says he used a payslip of one Bernadettee Maundu who was his colleague. It is not legal to compare yourself with another colleague even if you are on the same grade as each employee has his own specific terms. The claimant did not raise issues of his underpayment in the period he worked for the respondent. Even if employees deserve equal pay for same work in this case the petitioner has not established he equal contracts in his case and that of Bernadettee.
4. The Court finds the tabulation by the respondent was from 2007 to 2014. The court finds the tabulation given by the respondent worked out at Kshs 929,303/- as accurate amount and the same is awarded to the claimant. So claimant is awarded Kshs 929,303/-.
5. There will be interest accruing from the date of this judgment till full payment on the awarded amount at Court rates. Court had already ordered that respondent would pay the costs of the suit.Orders accordingly.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED VIRTUALLY IN NAIROBI THIS 18TH DAY OF JULY, 2024. ANNA NGIBUINI MWAUREJUDGEORDERIn view of the declaration of measures restricting Court operations due to the COVID-19 pandemic and in light of the directions issued by His Lordship, the Chief Justice on 15th March 2020 and subsequent directions of 21st April 2020 that judgments and rulings shall be delivered through video conferencing or via email. They have waived compliance with Order 21 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules, which requires that all judgments and rulings be pronounced in open Court. In permitting this course, this Court has been guided by Article 159(2)(d) of the Constitution which requires the Court to eschew undue technicalities in delivering justice, the right of access to justice guaranteed to every person under Article 48 of the Constitution and the provisions of Section 1B of the Procedure Act (Chapter 21 of the Laws of Kenya) which impose on this Court the duty of the Court, inter alia, to use suitable technology to enhance the overriding objective which is to facilitate just, expeditious, proportionate and affordable resolution of civil disputes.A signed copy will be availed to each party upon payment of Court fees.ANNA NGIBUINI MWAUREJUDGE