Uzuri Foods Limited v Manzi (Appeal E078 of 2022) [2025] KEELRC 2579 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Employment Court slashed a driver's award from Kshs 2 million to about Kshs 152,000, holding employees must prove overtime claims while employers must allow a companion at disciplinary hearings.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Burden of proof on the claim for overtime
The learned magistrate erred in law in holding that the burden of proving overtime did not rest on the claimant; the overtime claim was exaggerated and not proved on a balance of probabilities and the award was set aside.
The court applied Rogoli Ole Manadiegi: the employee bears the burden of establishing hours served in excess of the legal maximum. The respondent pleaded 36 overtime hours weekly but gave no dates, venues, or particulars of the long-distance trips; the claim was found exaggerated on a balance of probability. The magistrate erred in shifting the burden to the employer under section 10(7).
Public holiday pay award
The award of Kshs. 118,292/- for public holidays was upheld because the employer, custodian of the records, did not produce motor vehicle mileage records to controvert the specific dates pleaded.
The claimant pleaded specific dates of public holidays worked. The respondent employer, who admitted being custodian of employment records, failed to produce the motor vehicle mileage record to controvert the claim. The court found no basis to interfere with the trial magistrate's award on this head.
Substantive fairness of termination (cross-appeal)
The trial court's finding that the reasons for termination were valid was not disturbed; the respondent's allegation of dismissal for raising unremitted statutory deductions was correctly found untrue.
The dismissal letter cited excessive fuel demands and prior warnings. The claimant's own pleaded reason (raising non-remittance of NSSF deductions) was unsupported, as the NSSF statement showed remittances up to March 2018. Following Mbogo v Shah, the court found no basis to fault the trial court's findings on the reasons for termination.
Procedural fairness under section 41
The claimant was not afforded his right under section 41 to be accompanied by a fellow employee or union representative; the cross-appeal was allowed on procedure only, and one month's notice pay of Kshs. 33,544/- was awarded.
The minutes of the disciplinary hearing were produced but the court found the cross-appellant was not afforded his right to be accompanied by a witness of choice, and the invitation to the hearing was not produced. The trial court had not addressed this issue. The court limited the fault to procedure and awarded one month notice pay computed from the last payslip.
Legal principles established
#- The burden of establishing hours or days served in excess of the legal maximum rests with the employee
- For termination to pass the fairness test it must be both substantively justified and procedurally fair
- An employer who fails to prove the reason for termination is deemed to have unfairly terminated employment under section 45
- An appellate court must reconsider the evidence and draw its own conclusions while making allowance for not having seen or heard the witnesses
Court orders
#- 1.Appeal allowed; the award of overtime (Kshs. 1,876,046/-) disallowed and set aside
- 2.Cross-appeal allowed on procedure only, the termination being held procedurally defective under section 41 of the Employment Act
- 3.Judgment and Decree of the Hon. E.M. Kagoni (PM) delivered on 2nd June 2022 in MCELRC Cause No. 267 of 2018 set aside and substituted with judgment for the claimant of 1 month notice pay Kshs. 33,544/- plus public holiday back pay Kshs. 118,292/-, total Kshs. 151,836/- plus costs of the suit with interest at court rate from date of judgment
- 4.No order as to costs on the appeal and cross-appeal
- 5.Stay of 30 days granted
- On appeal from
- Chief Magistrate's Court (Employment and Labour Relations), Nairobi
- MCELRC Cause No. 267 of 2018
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Appellate jurisdiction of the Employment and Labour Relations Court over appeals from the Chief Magistrate's Employment and Labour Relations Cause (Memorandum of Appeal dated 20th June 2022 and Cross-appeal dated 8th July 2022)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Uzuri Foods Limited v Manzi (Appeal E078 of 2022) [2025] KEELRC 2579 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). ELRC Appeal (Nairobi), from MCELRC Cause No. 267 of 2018. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/2579/eng@2025-09-26
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.