[2020] KEELRC 1708 (KLR)
The court found that the Claimant failed to establish an employment relationship with the Respondents. The evidence, including the Respondents' certificate of incorporation and clearance certificates, indicated that the Claimant was employed by Target Guards Ltd, not the Respondents. The Claimant did not provide...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2020] KEELRC 1708 (KLR)
- Parties
- Claimant: Paulo Chacha Isack; Respondent: Manpower Guard Service; Respondent: Manpower & Logistics Limited
- Court
- Employment and Labour Relations Court
- Court Station
- Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Cause 1761 of 2014
- Procedural Posture
- Employment Cause / Judgment
- Outcome
- claim dismissed
- Judges
- MSA Makhandia
- Legal Topics
- Employment Relationship, Unfair Termination, Terminal Benefits
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Paulo Chacha Isack
Claimant
Manpower Guard Service
Respondent
Manpower & Logistics Limited
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether there existed an employment relationship between the Claimant and the Respondents.
- 2 Whether the Claimant was unfairly terminated by the Respondents.
- 3 Whether the Respondents are liable to pay terminal benefits to the Claimant.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the Claimant failed to establish an employment relationship with the Respondents. The evidence, including the Respondents' certificate of incorporation and clearance certificates, indicated that the Claimant was employed by Target Guards Ltd, not the Respondents. The Claimant did not provide evidence from the Registrar of Companies or any certificate of change of name to prove a nexus between Target Guards Ltd and the Respondents. Due to the separate juristic personalities of registered companies, the Respondents could not be held liable for any claims arising from the Claimant's employment with Target Guards Ltd. Consequently, the court dismissed the claim in its...
Court Disposition
claim dismissed
Orders
- The Cause is dismissed in its entirety.
- No order as to costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
33 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE EMPLOYMENT AND LABOUR RELATIONS COURT AT NAIROBI
CAUSE NO. 1761 OF 2014
PAULO CHACHA ISACK...........................................................CLAIMANT
VERSUS
MANPOWER GUARD SERVICE...................................1st RESPONDENT
MANPOWER & LOGISTICS LIMITED......................2nd RESPONDENT
JUDGMENT
1. Paulo Chacha Isack (Claimant) acting in person instituted legal proceedings against Manpower Guard Service (1st Respondent) on 8 October 2014 and he stated the Issues in Dispute as
Unfair termination and refusal by the Respondent to pay terminal benefits.
2. The 1st Respondent filed its Statement of Response on 18 November 2014.
3. The Claimant later engaged the services of an advocate and pursuant to leave of Court filed an Amended Statement of Claim on 12 March 2018.
4. The Respondent filed an Amended Response on 18 April 2018 and on 10 April 2019, the Claimant filed a Further Amended Statement of Claim after securing leave (the Further Amended Statement introduced Manpower & Logistics Ltd as the 2nd Respondent).
5. The Cause was heard on 6 November 2019. The Claimant and the 2nd Respondent’s Control Officer testified.
6. The Claimant filed his submissions on 20 November 2019 while the Respondents filed their submissions on 13 December 2019.
7. The parties did not agree on issues for determination and therefore the Court has isolated the Issues for determination as examined hereunder.
Employment relationship
8. The Claimant asserted that he was employed by the Respondents on 9 August 2003 as a security guard through an oral contract.
9. In both the Statement of Response and the Amended Response, the 1st Respondent denied that it had any contractual relationship with the Claimant, and it produced a certificate of incorporation during the hearing indicating that it was registered on 23 July 2012, and several Clearance Certificates and Discharges issued to the Claimant by an entity known as Target Guards Ltd.
10. The Clearance Certificates and Discharges suggest that the Claimant was on fixed-term contracts and that at the end of each year he would be paid cleared, and paid all dues under the contracts.
11. The Certificate of Incorporation and the Clearance Certificates and Discharges were served upon the Claimant but he did not bother to join Issue nor produce evidence from the Registrar of Companies or otherwise to establish a nexus between Target Guards Ltd, and the Respondents.
12. If indeed there was a change of name as asserted by the Claimant during oral testimony, nothing would have been simpler than to conduct a search at the Companies Registry and produce a Certificate of Change of Name.
13. In consideration of the evidence and records produced by the Respondents, the Court finds that the Respondents were not in any employment relationship with the Claimant.
14. The Court must admit however that there were tell-tale signs that the persons behind the Respondents had some relationship with the persons behind Target Guards Ltd but due to the juristic personality of registered persons, it cannot find the Respondents liable to the Claimant.
15. Regrettably having come to the conclusion that there was no employment relationship between the Claimant and the Respondents, the Court has no option but to dismiss the Cause in its entirety.
16. No order as to costs.
Delivered, dated and signed in Nairobi on this 31st day of January 2020.
Radido Stephen
Judge
Appearances
For Claimant Ms. Muumbo instructed by Carolyn K. Muumbo & Co. Advocates
For Respondents Ms. Kimani instructed by Mwaura & Wachira Advocates
Court Assistant Lindsey