Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCDismissedNot stated in judgment· [2022] KEELRC 754 (KLR)

Anthony Gathii Muhuri v Scott Travel Group Limited [2022] KEELRC 754 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
17 February 2022
LNLinnet Ndolo
680 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~3 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Claimant, Anthony Gathii Muhuri, was employed by Scott Travel Group Limited on 2nd December 2013 as a Tours and Travel Consultant and confirmed by letter dated 10th June 2014. He terminated the employment by notice dated 3rd May 2016, contending that the notice period was to be computed less pending leave days and that he left later than indicated at the Respondent's Managing Director's persuasion. He claimed Kshs. 95,000 in commission earned but unpaid, alleging the Respondent had repeatedly acknowledged the debt, and sought costs and interest. The Respondent admitted the employment but accused the Claimant of diverting business to a rival company and leaving with over 50% of assignments incomplete, attracting summary dismissal under Section 44(c) and (g) of the Employment Act. It admitted owing only Kshs. 41,760.67 in incentive, which the Claimant rejected, and contended the claim was premature for want of conciliation. The Respondent called no witness. Part of the Claimant's testimony had been taken by Makau J, and hearing resumed before Ndolo J on 3rd October 2021. The court held that unpaid commission constitutes special damages which must be specifically pleaded and strictly proved, citing Hahn v Singh [1985] KLR. As the Claimant offered no evidence beyond his own word, the claim failed and was dismissed, with each party bearing their own costs.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the Claimant proved the claim for unpaid commission

Holding

The claim failed as the Claimant provided no evidence beyond his own word; commission is special damages requiring strict proof

Reasoning

The court classified the claim for unpaid commission as special damages. Relying on Hahn v Singh, it noted such damages must be specifically pleaded and strictly proved. The Claimant testified but produced no documentary or other corroborative evidence of the Kshs. 95,000 alleged, and the Respondent denied the amount, admitting only Kshs. 41,760.67. In the absence of proof, the claim could not succeed.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • Special damages must not only be specifically pleaded but strictly proved

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The Claimant's claim for unpaid commission is dismissed
  2. 2.Each party to bear their own costs

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Employment ActSection 44(c) and (g)

Cases cited (1)

  • Hahn v Singh
    [1985] KLR
Jurisdiction invoked
Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction under the Employment and Labour Relations Court Act (dispute over unpaid commission arising from employment contract)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Later judgments citing this (1)

#

Judgments in the corpus that rely on this one. Where the Court said how it treated the authority, that is shown.

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Anthony Gathii Muhuri v Scott Travel Group Limited [2022] KEELRC 754 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2022). Not stated in judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2022/754/eng@2022-02-17

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.