Wanyonyi & 53 others v East Africa Portland Cement & another (Cause E049 of 2024) [2026] KEELRC 104 (KLR) (23 January 2026) (Ruling)
- Court
- Employment & Labour Relations Court
- Case number
- 104
- Citation
- [2026] KEELRC 104 (KLR)
- Decided
- 23 January 2026
Summary at a glance
TypeLabor DisputePostureMotion to strike out the 2nd Respondent from the proceedingsCoramSC RUTTO
The Court finds that the Claimants were employees of the 1st Respondent and the 2nd Respondent's Motion to strike out the 2nd Respondent is allowed.
Facts
The Claimants were deployed by the 1st Respondent to perform their duties at the 2nd Respondent's premises, under the instructions and supervision of the 2nd Respondent's personnel. The 1st Respondent reported the terminations of the Claimants to the County Labour Office.
Issues
- Whether the Claimants have an employment relationship with the 2nd Respondent
- Whether the Claimants' claim against the 2nd Respondent is valid
Reasoning
The Court concludes that the arrangement between the 1st and 2nd Respondents is akin to outsourcing, where the 1st Respondent was contracted by the 2nd Respondent under a similar arrangement. The Claimants remained employees of the 1st Respondent despite being deployed to the 2nd Respondent's premises.
Outcome
The 2nd Respondent is struck out of the proceedings.
Orders
- The 2nd Respondent is struck out of the proceedings
⚠ 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.
Loading judgment…