Lazarus Sindani & 14 others v Jiangxi Zhongmei Engineering Construction Company Limited [2018] KEELRC 1526 (KLR)
The bottom line
#What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the claimants proved underpayment of basic wages
No underpayment of basic pay was proved; the rates paid were consistent with the statutory minimums
The court compared the actual rates paid to the claimants against the rates in the Regulation of Wages (General) Order and the Building and Construction Industry Wages Order 2012. The Labour Officer had also found the underpayment claims were calculated on an hourly rate not provided for in the Wages Order, which provides for daily rates only. The court confirmed employees still in employment were not underpaid basic salary.
Whether the claimants were entitled to annual leave
Claimants in service are entitled to 21 days leave per year under Section 28 of the Employment Act, to be worked out and paid in lieu up to the date of filing suit
Counsel submitted the claimants were never allowed to go on leave. The court applied Section 28 of the Employment Act, which entitles each grievant in service to 21 days leave per year, and directed the respondent to work out and pay leave due in lieu up to the date of filing suit on 21st April 2015.
Whether the 3rd claimant was entitled to pay in lieu of notice
The claim for pay in lieu of notice was dismissed for lack of evidence on how he left employment
The 3rd claimant, Christopher Karanja Ngugi, stated he was dismissed on 7th November 2014 after workers went on strike, but no evidence was adduced on how he left employment. Without proof of the circumstances of separation, the claim for one month's pay in lieu of notice could not succeed.
Legal principles established
#- Each grievant in service is entitled to 21 days annual leave per year under Section 28 of the Employment Act
- Statutory deductions such as NSSF and NHIF are not refundable by the employer; claimants should approach the organisations directly if deductions were not remitted
Court orders
#- 1.The respondent is directed to work out and pay all the claimants their annual leave due in lieu of leave up to the date of filing suit on 21st April 2015
- 2.The claim for pay in lieu of notice by the 3rd claimant, Christopher Karanja Ngugi, is dismissed
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction over employment claims (no specific constitutional provision cited)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Lazarus Sindani & 14 others v Jiangxi Zhongmei Engineering Construction Company Limited [2018] KEELRC 1526 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2018). Not stated in judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2018/1526/eng@2018-07-05
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.