Aminga v Gain Ventures & 2 others (Cause E096 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 1062 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Employment Court refused to remove an outsourcing company from an unfair dismissal case, because who actually employed the worker can only be decided after a full hearing.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether Bluetti was improperly joined as a party for want of an employer-employee relationship with the Claimant
The application to strike out Bluetti was declined; on the documents, Bluetti could not be removed at the interlocutory stage because the termination letter and contract chain implicated it
The Court referred only to the documentary record without resolving disputed facts. The Claimant was engaged through a chain of contracts with Bluetti, Market Dimension Ltd and Gain Ventures Ltd, and the termination letter was on Gain Ventures' letterhead yet referred to probation contracts with Bluetti Energy Kenya Ltd. Given the statutory definition of employer in section 2 of the Employment Act, 2007, Gain Ventures Ltd might be an agent or factor of Bluetti, and remedies were sought against all Respondents jointly. Whether all Respondents were ultimately liable was a matter for evidence, and Bluetti could be compensated by costs if it proved an improper party.
Whether outsourcing arrangements lacking statutory guidance warrant caution before striking out any party in the chain
Yes; the Court observed outsourcing is unregulated and may disadvantage employees, justifying cautious treatment of the joinder question
The Court noted that no statute or law currently guides outsourcing arrangements, making employees vulnerable as far as contractual rights are concerned. Where a Claimant is moved between legal entities under probationary contracts, addendum contracts and extensions, the interlocutory stage is too early to excise any entity in the chain; the true nature of the transactions may be unravelled by evidence at the hearing.
Legal principles established
#- Outsourcing of labour is not governed by any statute or law currently, and is prone to put employees at a disadvantage as far as contractual rights are concerned
- Under the definition of employer in section 2 of the Employment Act, 2007, an entity taking over or terminating another's employee contract may be presumed to be an agent or factor of the contracting employer at the interlocutory stage
Court orders
#- 1.The Summons dated 11 April 2024 is dismissed with costs in the cause
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction under the Employment Act, 2007 (unfair/unlawful dismissal and breach of contract claim)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Aminga v Gain Ventures & 2 others (Cause E096 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 1062 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in the judgment (Employment Cause). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/1062/eng@2025-04-03
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.