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

Nayweni & 45 others v African Shipping Limited & 47 others; International Transport Federation & 4 others (Interested Party) (Petition E007 of 2022) [2023] KEELRC 3456 (KLR) (7 December 2023) (Ruling)

[2023] KEELRC 3456 (KLR) Employment & Labour Relations Court
Read PDF
Court
Employment & Labour Relations Court
Case number
3456
Citation
[2023] KEELRC 3456 (KLR)
Decided
7 December 2023
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

TypePetitionPostureRespondent's Motion to DismissCoramM MBARŨ
The petition is not a proper petition and is dismissed with costs.

Facts

The petitioners claim to be employed by contractors to the respondents, but the respondents argue that the petitioners are independent contractors and thus no employment relationship exists.

Issues

  • Whether the petition is a proper petition
  • Whether the court has jurisdiction over the claims

Reasoning

The court found that there is no employment relationship between the petitioners and the respondents, and thus the court lacks jurisdiction. The petitioners were not in an employment relationship and could not move the court under a petition.

Outcome

Dismissed with costs

Orders

  • Petition dismissed

Authorities cited

Legislation (2)
  • Employment and Labour Relations Court Act, 2011
  • Employment Act, 2007
Cases cited (4)
  • Housing Finance Co. of Kenya Limited v Gilbert Kibe Njuguna
  • Stanley Mukei v National Oil Co.
  • Lugo v Director of Public Prosecutions
  • KKB v SCM & 5 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