Amina Bakari Babu v Indu Farm (EPZ) Limited [2015] KEELRC 47 (KLR)
The bottom line
#An employee who doesn't present evidence in court loses her case, no matter how strong her written claims sound.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Burden of proof in wrongful termination and terminal dues claims
The Claimant, having elected not to adduce evidence and having filed no reply to the defence, failed to discharge the burden on a balance of probabilities; the court accepted the Respondent's version that she was caught with a colleague's stolen property and never returned to work
The court held that the burden lies on the claimant who asserts. The claimant opted not to adduce evidence in support of the memorandum of claim, which contained bare, unsubstantiated averments. She also failed to file a reply to the statement of response, leaving the court to accept the respondent's unchallenged version of the casual employment, the snap search, and her failure to return.
Continuous service, leave, overtime and public holiday pay
The court found the Claimant worked for the Respondent only from time to time on a daily wage and was duly paid for any overtime or public holiday work
Because the Claimant produced no documentary or oral evidence of continuous seven-year service, leave denial, overtime or unpaid public holiday work, the claims remained hollow averments. The claims had been denied by the Respondent, and the absence of a reply meant those denials stood uncontroverted, so the claims failed in their entirety.
Legal principles established
#- The burden of proving the particulars of a claim lies on the party who asserts, and unproved averments cannot found an award
- A claimant who fails to discharge the burden of proof on a balance of probabilities fails in the claim
Court orders
#- 1.The entire suit is dismissed for lack of proof to the standard required
- 2.Costs awarded to the Respondent
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction under Article 162(2) of the Constitution (employment and labour relations dispute)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Amina Bakari Babu v Indu Farm (EPZ) Limited [2015] KEELRC 47 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2015). Cause No 979 of 2010. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2015/47/eng@2015-12-09
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.