Hellen Njoki Kiboi v Harun Mwangi Muriithi & 2 others [2013] KEELRC 905 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court ruled a water society's worker was a lawful employee and awarded her unpaid salary, overtime, leave pay and costs.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the claimant was an employee of the respondent
The court found the claimant was the respondent's employee at all material times, rejecting the respondent's witness's contradictory evidence as incredible
The claimant produced a letter of appointment and acceptance, reported on duty on 12.02.2010, and CW2, the respondent's former chairperson, confirmed the employment. RW's evidence that she ceased working was found contradictory and incredible. The court therefore declared her a lawful employee and entered judgment accordingly.
Whether the claimant was entitled to unpaid salary from 1.9.2011 to 24.02.2012
Yes, Kshs.73,214.30 awarded as submitted for the claimant
The respondent challenged exhibit 5(a) and exhibit 1(e) as unreliable and contended the claimant never earned Kshs.12,500 per month. The court found no ground to doubt the documents, which were corroborated by CW2, and computed the unpaid salary as submitted for the claimant.
Whether the claimant was entitled to leave pay
Yes, for 2 years and 2 months, Kshs.26,458.00, per section 28 of the Employment Act, 2007
The claimant testified she never went on annual leave throughout her service, confirmed by CW2. Applying section 28 of the Employment Act, 2007, the court awarded leave pay commensurate with her actual service period rather than the three years claimed.
Whether the claimant was entitled to overtime pay
Yes, Kshs.30,198.00 awarded
The claimant testified she reported at 6.00 am Monday to Saturday to sell water until 9.00 am before commencing her agreed duties, supported by exhibit 5(a) showing over 700 overtime hours. CW2 confirmed she was entitled to the overtime as claimed, and the court found the claim established.
Legal principles established
#- An employee whose salary is withheld is entitled to payment of the arrears
- Leave entitlement accrues under section 28 of the Employment Act, 2007
Court orders
#- 1.a declaration that the claimant was a lawful employee of the respondent society
- 2.a declaration that it was wrongful, unlawful and unfair for the respondent to withhold the claimant's salary and allowances as the claimant was entitled to the payment
- 3.the respondent to pay the claimant Kshs.129,870.60 by 15.12.2013, in default interest at court rates to be payable from the date of the filing of the suit, 21.02.2013
- 4.the respondent to pay costs of the suit
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction over employment claims (Employment Act, 2007)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Hellen Njoki Kiboi v Harun Mwangi Muriithi & 2 others [2013] KEELRC 905 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2013). Not stated in judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2013/905/eng@2013-11-29
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.