Richard N. Onyonyi v Dhl Excess Supply Chain (K) Ltd [2013] KEELRC 701 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court threw out a manager's Kshs.9.2 million claim for extra duties because he had no written proof his job had actually changed.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the Claimant proved variation of his employment contract to include Workshop Manager duties
The Claimant failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that his contract was varied; the contract required written variation, and the emails evidencing a grievance did not establish a change in responsibilities
The letter of appointment left core responsibilities to a separate document, and the signed terms and conditions (effective 1st December 2007) stipulated that promotion or variation must be in writing showing the new title and responsibilities. Though the Claimant raised grievances by email from November 2008 to January 2010, which went unanswered, he nonetheless signed the terms and conditions of service. He did not testify, so there was no oral evidence of variation.
Evidentiary burden for establishing an oral variation of contract
Contracts may be varied in writing or orally, but an alleged oral variation must be supported by led evidence
The court acknowledged that a contract may be varied in writing or orally, but where oral variation is alleged, evidence must be led to that effect. As the Claimant did not testify and the Respondent made only a bare denial, the emails were insufficient to displace the written contract terms requiring variation in writing.
Legal principles established
#- Where an employment contract requires variation of core terms to be in writing, a party alleging variation must lead documentary evidence; unsubstantiated grievances in emails do not suffice
- An alleged oral variation of contract terms must be proved by evidence
Court orders
#- 1.The entire suit is dismissed with no order as to costs
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Jurisdiction of the Industrial Court of Kenya over employment and labour relations disputes (Cause No. 1292 of 2010)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Richard N. Onyonyi v Dhl Excess Supply Chain (K) Ltd [2013] KEELRC 701 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2013). Cause No. 1292 of 2010. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2013/701/eng@2013-07-12
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.