[2018] KEELRC 448 (KLR)

[2018] KEELRC 448 (KLR)

The court found that the 2nd contract between the claimant and the respondent was expressly for an independent contractor relationship, not employment. Both parties had previously engaged in an employer-employee relationship, but the 2nd contract was entered into with full knowledge and clarity regarding the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] KEELRC 448 (KLR)
Parties
Claimant: Jacqueline Kamene Munguli [Munguti]; Respondent: Pan Africa Express Transport Limited
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Mombasa
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Cause 58 of 2016
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Judgment
Outcome
Claimant's claims under the 2nd contract are dismissed; judgment entered in terms of the consent recorded for the 1st contract.
Judges
J Rika
Legal Topics
Independent Contractor Status, Employment Relationship, Termination of Contract, Employee Rights
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Independent Contractor Status Employment Relationship Termination of Contract Employee Rights

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 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jacqueline Kamene Munguli [Munguti]

Claimant

Pan Africa Express Transport Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Cause / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the claimant was an employee or an independent contractor under the 2nd contract.
  2. 2 Whether the claimant is entitled to remedies for unfair termination under the 2nd contract.
  3. 3 Whether the respondent was entitled to terminate the 2nd contract for failure to meet sales targets.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the 2nd contract between the claimant and the respondent was expressly for an independent contractor relationship, not employment. Both parties had previously engaged in an employer-employee relationship, but the 2nd contract was entered into with full knowledge and clarity regarding the claimant's status as an independent contractor. The contract set out clear conditions for transition to full employment, which the claimant failed to meet, and there was no evidence to suggest that the contract was a sham or that the claimant was misled. The Employment Act does not recognize a hybrid status of part-employee, part-independent contractor. As such, the claimant was not...

Court Disposition

Claimant's claims under the 2nd contract are dismissed; judgment entered in terms of the consent recorded for the 1st contract.

Orders

  • Final judgment is entered in favour of the claimant in terms of the consent recorded in court on 6th November 2017.
  • All claims under the 2nd contract are declined.