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

Cain v Elsek and Elsek (K) Limited (Cause 1953 of 2015) [2022] KEELRC 13094 (KLR) (7 November 2022) (Judgment)

[2022] KEELRC 13094 (KLR) Employment & Labour Relations Court
Read PDF
Court
Employment & Labour Relations Court
Case number
13094
Citation
[2022] KEELRC 13094 (KLR)
Decided
7 November 2022
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

TypeEmployment DisputePostureClaimant seeks orders for payment of dues and compensation, Respondent denies employment relationshipCoramMA ONYANGO
The Court found that an employment relationship existed between the Claimant and the Respondent, and the Claimant is entitled to the prayers sought.

Facts

Claimant worked as a Financial Advisor for Respondent from January to March 2015. He was not paid salary and was asked to return a car. The parties communicated via email, indicating an intention to enter into an employment contract.

Issues

  • Whether there was an employment relationship between the Claimant and the Respondent
  • Whether the employment relationship was breached
  • Whether the Claimant is entitled to the prayers sought

Reasoning

The Court considered the email correspondence and evidence, finding that the parties had a meeting of minds regarding an employment contract. The Claimant's performance was considered as executing his consideration.

Outcome

Claimant's claims upheld

Orders

  • An order directing the Respondent to immediately and unconditionally pay the Claimant's dues for the period between January and April, 2015 being the sum of US$40,000.00
  • An award for appropriate compensation for breach of contract by the Respondent for twelve months’ salary being the sum of US$ 120,000.00
  • Damages for breach of contract
  • Exemplary damages
  • All other benefits that the Claimant is entitled to

Authorities cited

Cases cited (3)
  • Charles Mwirigi Miriti v Thananga Tea Growers Sacco Ltd & Another [2014] eKLR
  • Karmali Tarmohammed & Another v I H Lakhani & Company [1958] EA 567
  • Mamta Peeush Mahajan [Suing on behalf of the estate of the late Peeush Premlal Mahajan] v Yashwant Kumari Mahajan [Sued personally and as Executrix of the estate and beneficiary of the estate of the late Krishan Lal Mahajan] [2017] eKLR
⚠ 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