[2017] KEELRC 763 (KLR)

[2017] KEELRC 763 (KLR)

The court found that the claimant failed to provide any documentary evidence, such as a letter of appointment, to establish an employment relationship with the 1st respondent. The only agreement presented was between the 1st and 2nd respondents for gardening and cleaning services, not for the claimant's employment....

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2017] KEELRC 763 (KLR)
Parties
Claimant: Jared Onduso; Respondent: Pradeek K. Sood; Respondent: Nicholas Obiria
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Cause 1235 of 2016
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Ruling on Application to Strike Out Party
Outcome
1st respondent struck out from the suit.
Judges
DI Wasike
Legal Topics
Employment Relationship, Employee Status, Striking Out Party
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Employment Relationship Employee Status Striking Out Party

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jared Onduso

Claimant

Pradeek K. Sood

Respondent

Nicholas Obiria

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Cause / Ruling on Application to Strike Out Party

  1. 1 Whether the claimant was an employee of the 1st respondent.
  2. 2 Whether the 1st respondent should be struck out from the proceedings.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the claimant failed to provide any documentary evidence, such as a letter of appointment, to establish an employment relationship with the 1st respondent. The only agreement presented was between the 1st and 2nd respondents for gardening and cleaning services, not for the claimant's employment. The court also found the claimant's assertion of coercion to work as a driver without consent implausible. Consequently, the court accepted the 1st respondent's contention that the claimant was not his employee and allowed the application to strike out the 1st respondent from the suit.

Court Disposition

1st respondent struck out from the suit.

Orders

  • The 1st respondent is hereby struck out from this suit.