[2013] KEELRC 414 (KLR)
The court found that there was insufficient evidence on record to make a fair decision due to conflicting evidence and the Respondents' failure to file full particulars of the Claimants' employment. The court also noted that the parties had not addressed the issue of which Respondent was the actual employer. As a...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2013] KEELRC 414 (KLR)
- Parties
- Claimant: Stephen Kariuki; Claimant: Moses Mwangi; Respondent: Michael Njoroge; Respondent: Sandstone Logistics Limited/Cylinder Works Limited
- Court
- Employment and Labour Relations Court
- Court Station
- Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Cause 888 of 2010
- Procedural Posture
- Employment Cause / Interlocutory Ruling on Sufficiency of Evidence and Directions for Further Hearing
- Outcome
- Further hearing directed; interlocutory orders issued for filing of employment particulars and oral evidence.
- Legal Topics
- Employment Relationship, Burden of Proof, Employment Records, Remuneration Entitlements
- 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
Stephen Kariuki
Claimant
Moses Mwangi
Claimant
Michael Njoroge
Respondent
Sandstone Logistics Limited/Cylinder Works Limited
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Interlocutory Ruling on Sufficiency of Evidence and Directions for Further Hearing
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether there is sufficient evidence to determine the employment relationship between the Claimants and the Respondents.
- 2 Whether the Respondents have provided full particulars of the Claimants' employment as required by law.
- 3 Who among the Respondents was the employer responsible for any dues to the Claimants.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that there was insufficient evidence on record to make a fair decision due to conflicting evidence and the Respondents' failure to file full particulars of the Claimants' employment. The court also noted that the parties had not addressed the issue of which Respondent was the actual employer. As a result, the court directed the parties to take a hearing date for oral evidence and ordered the Respondents to file full particulars of employment, including details on annual leave, work on public holidays, house allowance, and overtime. The court provided timelines for the filing of supplementary submissions and responses, emphasizing the need for compliance with statutory...
Court Disposition
Further hearing directed; interlocutory orders issued for filing of employment particulars and oral evidence.
Orders
- Parties to take a hearing date in the registry for oral evidence.
- Respondents to file full particulars of the Claimants' employment, including annual leave, public holidays, house allowance, and overtime, within 14 days.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
24 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
Industrial Court of Kenya
Cause 888 of 2010 [if gte mso 9]><xml>
14. 00
800x600
</xml><![endif]
1. STEPHEN KARIUKI...................................................................................................CLAIMANT
2. MOSES MWANGI......................................................................................................CLAIMANT
VERSUS
MICHAEL NJOROGE.......................................................................................1ST RESPONDENT
SANDSTONE LOGISTICS LIMITED/CYLINDER WORKS LIMITED..........2ND RESPONDENT
RULING
The Claimants Stephen Kariukiand Moses Mwangi have both filed disputes against the Respondent Sandstone Logistics Ltd and Cylinder Works Ltd jointly with Michael Njoroge. When the matter came up for hearing before Hon. Justice Isaac Mukunya on 5th October 2011, he referred the dispute to the Labour Commissioner for investigation. The Report of the Labour Officer was filed in Court on 6th February 2012. The parties made submissions before me on 4th December 2012 with Mr. Kandere for the Claimants asking the Court to disregard the report for various reasons while Mr. Nyaanga for the Respondents asked the Court to adopt the report.
I have read the report, the pleadings by both parties and considered the oral submissions made by the parties and find that there is insufficient evidence to enable me make a fair decision because of the conflicting evidence on the record. I also note that the Respondent has not filed full particulars in respect of the employment of both Claimants. Both parties have also not addressed the issue of who among the three Respondents, on record was the employer of the Claimants to enable the court make a determination on whether all or any of them should be responsible to pay the Claimants the amounts, if any, that may be awarded by this Court.
For these reasons the parties are directed to take a hearing date in the registry so that each party can have an opportunity to submit its evidence. The Respondents are directed to file full particulars of the employment of the Claimants and specifically information relating to annual leave, work on public holidays, house allowance and overtime as required to be kept by law. The Respondent should file the same through supplementary submissions within 14 days from the date of this ruling. Should the Claimants wish to file a response to the same, they may do so within 7 days from date of service.
The registry is directed to give a date on priority basis.
Orders accordingly.
Read in open Court and signed on this 7th day of February, 2013.
HON. LADY JUSTICE MAUREEN ONYANGO.
JUDGE.
Ms. Ngesa h/b for kandere Opiyo for
In the presence of:___________________________________ Claimant
Mr. Nyaanga for the
___________________________________ Respondent