Evans B. Mabiya & 2 others v African Marine General Co. Ltd [2022] KEELRC 656 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Winning the argument on employment wasn't enough—the workers' Kshs. 993,913 claim collapsed because they never pleaded or proved exactly what each was owed.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Existence of a contract of employment
The Court found that the parties were in a contract of employment; the respondent's counsel's reply letter confirmed the claimants were employed as casuals, and the respondent was the principal employer who paid the claimants through agents
The respondent's advocate's reply to the demand letter confirmed employment as casuals, contradicting the defence denial. Under section 2 of the Employment Act, 'employer' includes a person who has entered a contract of service and also an agent, foreman, manager or factor. The respondent was the principal employer for whom the claimants worked, paying them through agents, so a contract of service existed.
Entitlement to terminal dues claimed
The claim for terminal dues failed because the global sum was not specifically pleaded or strictly proved, and the evidence of casual service was inconsistent with redundancy
The claimants pleaded a global sum without particulars for each claimant. CW1 and CW2 were incoherent on overtime computation, and CW2's reliance on a wage order postdating his service undermined underpayment claims. Their consistent testimony that they were casual workers was inconsistent with alleged redundancy under section 40. The labour officer's computation was disowned and not agreed to by the respondent.
Legal principles established
#- Special or liquidated damages must be specifically pleaded and strictly proved
- The definition of employer under section 2 of the Employment Act includes a person who has entered a contract of service and includes an agent, foreman, manager or factor of such person
Court orders
#- 1.Judgment entered for the respondent against the claimants for dismissal of the suit
- 2.Each party to bear own costs of the suit
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and labour relations jurisdiction (Employment Act, 2007); original ELRC claim filed by plaint and later amended memorandum of claim
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Evans B. Mabiya & 2 others v African Marine General Co. Ltd [2022] KEELRC 656 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2022). . Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2022/656/eng@2022-02-25
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.