SheriaNet for Android — search and read Kenyan case law from your phone, offline.
Join the beta →

Raphael M. Nzomo & 7 others v Nairobi County Government & 4 others [2017] KEELRC 3 (KLR)

[2017] KEELRC 3 (KLR) Employment & Labour Relations Court
Read PDF
Court
Employment & Labour Relations Court
Case number
3
Citation
[2017] KEELRC 3 (KLR)
Decided
2 November 2017
Beta Machine-generated summary. Automatically produced by AI from the judgment text — it may be incomplete or inaccurate. Always verify against the full judgment below. Not legal advice.

Summary at a glance

TypePetitionPostureRespondents filed a preliminary objection.CoramNzioki wa Makau
The Petition is struck out with costs as it is in the wrong forum.

Facts

Petitioners are directors and shareholders of the Interested Party, regulated by the Companies Act 2015, Water Act, and Company's Memorandum and Articles of Association.

Issues

  • Whether the Employment and Labour Relations Court has jurisdiction over disputes between directors and shareholders of a company.
  • Whether the Petitioners are employees of the Interested Party and thus subject to the Employment Act.

Reasoning

The court lacks jurisdiction to determine disputes between directors of companies other than the Managing Director and other salaried directors.

Outcome

Struck out with costs

Orders

  • Petition struck out with costs

Authorities cited

Legislation (4)
  • Employment and Labour Relations Court Act 2012
  • Companies Act 2015
  • Water Act
  • Employment Act
Cases cited (3)
  • David Randu v Malindi Sewerage Company Limited
  • Geoffrey Makana Asanyo v Nakuru Water and Sanitation Services Company & 6 Others
  • George Maina Kamau v County Assembly of Murang’a & Others
⚠ This summary is experimental and generated by a language model, not a lawyer. It can contain errors, omissions, or misinterpretations and must not be relied on for legal decisions. The authoritative source is the full judgment. Please confirm every point against the original before use.
Full judgment 0.2 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case