[2017] KEHC 4140 (KLR)

[2017] KEHC 4140 (KLR)

The court found that by conceding the respondent was not the employer, the claimant admitted there was no employment relationship between the parties. As a result, no cause of action could be maintained against the respondent. The court held that the memorandum of claim was unsustainable and that introducing a third...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2017] KEHC 4140 (KLR)
Parties
Claimant: Ronald Luvisia Masinde; Respondent: Eldoret Grains Limited
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Eldoret
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Cause 187 of 2017
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Ruling on Motion to Strike Out Claim and Third Party Notice
Outcome
Claim struck out with costs to the respondent; costs to be borne personally by the claimant's advocate.
Judges
MSA Makhandia
Legal Topics
Unfair Termination, Proper Parties, Third Party Procedure, Costs Award
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Unfair Termination Proper Parties Third Party Procedure Costs Award

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 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ronald Luvisia Masinde

Claimant

Eldoret Grains Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Cause / Ruling on Motion to Strike Out Claim and Third Party Notice

  1. 1 Whether the claimant was unlawfully, unprocedurally and unfairly terminated from employment by the respondent.
  2. 2 Whether the claimant is entitled to compensation for unlawful, unprocedural and unfair termination as prayed for in the memorandum of claim.
  3. 3 Whether the claimant is entitled to an award of a certificate of service.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that by conceding the respondent was not the employer, the claimant admitted there was no employment relationship between the parties. As a result, no cause of action could be maintained against the respondent. The court held that the memorandum of claim was unsustainable and that introducing a third party would only complicate already confused pleadings. The proper course was to strike out the claim with costs to the respondent, and the costs were to be borne personally by the claimant's advocate due to the improper filing and confusion caused.

Court Disposition

Claim struck out with costs to the respondent; costs to be borne personally by the claimant's advocate.

Orders

  • The memorandum(s) of claim presented herein are struck out with costs to the respondent.
  • The costs are to be borne personally by the claimant(s) advocate on record.