[2022] KEHC 2164 (KLR)
The court found that the Claimant was an independent contractor based on multiple sources, including his own evidence, the job card description, findings of the Labour Officer, and the nature of the pay slips, which referred to earnings subject to withholding tax rather than salary. The pay slips relied upon in the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2022] KEHC 2164 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Silas Okome; Respondent: Panesars Kenya Limited
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Cause 725 of 2014
- Procedural Posture
- Review Application / Ruling on Application for Review of Judgment
- Outcome
- application for review declined
- Judges
- J Rika
- Legal Topics
- Employment Status, Independent Contractor Vs Employee, Review of Judgment
- 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
Silas Okome
Applicant
Panesars Kenya Limited
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Ruling on Application for Review of Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Claimant was an employee or an independent contractor of the Respondent.
- 2 Whether the application for review of judgment disclosed new evidence or error apparent on the face of the record.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the Claimant was an independent contractor based on multiple sources, including his own evidence, the job card description, findings of the Labour Officer, and the nature of the pay slips, which referred to earnings subject to withholding tax rather than salary. The pay slips relied upon in the review application were not new evidence and did not establish an employer-employee relationship. There was no error apparent on the face of the record, and the requirements for review under Order 45 of the Civil Procedure Rules were not met. Consequently, the application for review was declined.
Court Disposition
application for review declined
Orders
- The Application by the Claimant dated 28th July 2021 is declined.
- Costs to the Respondent.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
24 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE INDUSTRIAL COURT
AT NAIROBI
CAUSE NUMBER 725 OF 2014
BETWEEN
SILAS OKOME...............................................................................................CLAIMANT
VERSUS
PANESARS KENYA LIMITED...............................................................RESPONDENT
RULING
1. Based on the Claimant’s own evidence that: he designed on his own; he determined the time of completion of assignment; he arranged his own work; his job card described him as a contractor; the Labour Officer found that he was a piece rate worker; and that the Respondent assigned him premises, the Court reached the finding that the Claimant was an Independent Contractor and not an Employee of the Respondent.
2. The Claim was consequently rejected.
3. The Claimant has applied for review of Judgment, through an Application dated 28th July 2021. The Application is based on the Affidavit of his previous Counsel, Wincate Muthoni Mwangi. It is stated that at the time of the hearing, the Claimant did not avail pay slips, which would show he was an Employee, rather than an Independent Contractor.
4. The Claimant has since withdrawn the services of his Advocates, and prosecuted the Application in person, on 16th December 2021.
5. The Application is opposed through the Replying Affidavit of J. Njoroge Mungai, Counsel for the Respondent. The pay slips were part of the documents exhibited by the Parties. There is no discovery of new material. There is no error apparent on the face of the record.
The Court Finds: -
6. The finding that the Claimant was an Independent Contractor was based on multiple sources, and not solely on the documents the Claimant relies on, on review.
7. He conceded in his own evidence, that he was an Independent Contractor.
8. The pay slips were exhibited by both Parties, and while one of the payslips of May 2013 alluded to PAYE, a majority of the pay slips availed to the Court referred to Withholding Tax. All did not allude to salary paid to the Claimant, but earnings. These earnings varied, depending on the number of items completed by the Claimant for the specified period. The pay slips he relies on for review are not new, and do not establish an employer-employee relationship.
IT IS ORDERED: -
a. The Application by the Claimant dated 28th July 2021 is declined.
b. Costs to the Respondent.
DATED, SIGNED AND RELEASED TO THE PARTIES ELECTRONICALLY, AT NAIROBI, UNDER THE MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND JUDICIARY COVID-19 GUIDELINES, THIS 24TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022.
JAMES RIKA
JUDGE