[2017] KEELRC 759 (KLR)

[2017] KEELRC 759 (KLR)

The court found that, based on the claimant's own pleadings, the relationship between the claimant and the respondent was that of an independent contractor, constituting a contract for services rather than a contract of service. As such, the dispute did not fall within the jurisdiction of the Employment and Labour...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2017] KEELRC 759 (KLR)
Parties
Claimant: David Okutoto Obuchele; Respondent: Cosmocare Limited
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Cause 1871 of 2015
Procedural Posture
Cause / Ruling on Preliminary Objection
Outcome
preliminary objection upheld; suit struck out with costs
Judges
DI Wasike
Legal Topics
Employment Relationship, Independent Contractor, Jurisdiction, Contract for Services
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Employment Relationship Independent Contractor Jurisdiction Contract for Services

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David Okutoto Obuchele

Claimant

Cosmocare Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Cause / Ruling on Preliminary Objection

  1. 1 Whether the relationship between the claimant and respondent was one of employment or independent contracting.
  2. 2 Whether the Employment and Labour Relations Court has jurisdiction over disputes involving independent contractors.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that, based on the claimant's own pleadings, the relationship between the claimant and the respondent was that of an independent contractor, constituting a contract for services rather than a contract of service. As such, the dispute did not fall within the jurisdiction of the Employment and Labour Relations Court, which is limited to employment relationships as defined under section 2 of the Employment Act. The preliminary objection was therefore upheld, and the suit was struck out with costs.

Court Disposition

preliminary objection upheld; suit struck out with costs

Orders

  • The suit is struck out with costs.