2.
Burden of proof-He who alleges the existence of a contract must prove
Facts
The applicant took out this action against the respondent alleging that he was offered employment and that he had accepted. He further
alleged that he was advised to wait for posting but that the posting never materialized. He alleged that he had been unfairly denied
of employment. The respondent contended that the applicant attended interviews but he did not succeed. He was accordingly informed
by letter that he had not been successful in the interviews. They denied denying the applicant the opportunity to work.
The Law
In any contract there must be offer and acceptance. In employment a prospective employee or employer offers services to the other.
The other accepts after considering the terms and conditions including consideration in case of employment this could be salary for
work done.
The burden of proving that a contract exists is on the person alleging its existence. In this case the applicant bears the burden
of showing the court on a balance of probabilities that he entered into an employment contract with the respondent. The evidence
that the applicant adduced was that his brother got a call from someone working for the respondent who informed him (the brother)
that the applicant had been successful in interviews. The applicant met this person and they discussed modalities. There was no official
letter to confirm the meeting or the success in the interviews. The respondent on the other hand showed court that the applicant
had not succeeded in the interview. An official notification was sent him through a letter. The court had no basis for disputing
the respondent’s evidence after the applicant failed to substantiate his allegation of the existence of a contract with the
respondent.
Finding
The applicant failed to prove his case. This action is dismissed in its entirety.
Any aggrieved by this decision is at liberty to appeal to the High Court within 30 days of this judgment.
.RTF of original document