Samuel Mangale Madzao & 4 others v Dhanjal Investments Limited t/a Travellers Beach & Hotel [2020] eKLR Case Summary

Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Mombasa
Category
Civil
Judge(s)
Hon. Justice James Rika
Judgment Date
October 12, 2020
Country
Kenya
Document Type
PDF
Number of Pages
3
Explore the 2020 eKLR case summary of Samuel Mangale Madzao & 4 others v Dhanjal Investments Limited. Discover key legal insights and implications from this landmark judgment.


Case Brief: Samuel Mangale Madzao & 4 others v Dhanjal Investments Limited t/a Travellers Beach & Hotel [2020] eKLR

1. Case Information:
- Name of the Case: Samuel Mangale Madzao & Others v. Dhanjal Investments Limited
- Case Number: Cause Number 744 of 2016
- Court: Employment and Labour Relations Court, Mombasa
- Date Delivered: 12th October 2020
- Category of Law: Employment Law (Civil)
- Judge(s): Hon. Justice James Rika
- Country: Kenya

2. Questions Presented:
The central legal issues in this case include:
- Whether the termination of the Claimants' employment was unfair and unlawful.
- The appropriate compensation due to the Claimants for their claims of unfair termination, notice, annual leave, and severance pay.

3. Facts of the Case:
The Claimants, five former employees of Dhanjal Investments Limited, were employed in various capacities from 2003 to 2007, with wages ranging from Kshs. 120 to Kshs. 400 per day. They all left their employment on 4th May 2016, claiming their contracts were terminated unfairly by the Respondent. The Claimants sought various forms of compensation, including notice, annual leave, severance pay, and compensation for unfair termination. The Respondent contended that the Claimants were casual workers, and their contracts were not terminated but rather their services were no longer required due to alleged theft.

4. Procedural History:
The Claimants filed separate Statements of Claim on 4th October 2016. The Respondent submitted a Statement of Response on 22nd November 2016, denying the claims and asserting the Claimants were casual employees. The hearing occurred on 25th September 2019, with the Respondent absent, leading to an ex parte hearing. The Respondent later filed an application to reopen the hearing, which was not pursued. The Court directed both parties to file their Closing Submissions, but the Respondent failed to do so. Judgment was delivered on 12th October 2020.

5. Analysis:
- Rules: The court considered several provisions of the Employment Act, particularly Sections 40 (redundancy), 41 (procedural fairness), 43 (burden of proof in dismissal), 45 (unfair termination), and 47(5) (unjustified dismissal).
- Case Law: The court referenced previous rulings that emphasize the necessity of fair procedures in employment termination and the burden on employers to prove just cause for dismissal. However, no specific cases were cited in the judgment.
- Application: The court determined that the Respondent's failure to provide evidence or attend the hearing left the Claimants' claims unchallenged. The court found the termination of the Claimants' employment was unfair as it did not meet the standards of fairness outlined in the Employment Act. The court rejected claims for severance pay due to lack of evidence supporting redundancy but accepted claims for notice and annual leave.

6. Conclusion:
The court ruled in favor of the Claimants, declaring their termination unfair and awarding them compensation for notice, annual leave, and unfair termination. The decision underscores the importance of adhering to fair employment practices and the necessity for employers to substantiate claims of misconduct.

7. Dissent:
There were no dissenting opinions recorded in this case, as the judgment was delivered by a single judge.

8. Summary:
The Employment and Labour Relations Court found that Dhanjal Investments Limited unlawfully terminated the employment of five Claimants. The court awarded compensation totaling Kshs. 1,026,150, emphasizing the importance of fair treatment in employment and the legal obligations of employers to provide evidence in disputes regarding termination. This case highlights the legal protections afforded to employees under Kenyan law and sets a precedent for similar employment disputes.

Document Summary

Below is the summary preview of this document.

  • Samuel-Mangale-Madzao--4-others-v-Dhanjal-Investments-Limited-t-a-Travellers-Beach--Hotel-[2020]-eKLR-Case-Summary_1636_0.jpg

This is the end of the summary preview.

Related Documents

View all summaries