Methodist Church in Kenya Trustees Registered & another v Maso (Cause E005 of 2023) [2025] KEELRC 1096 (KLR)
The bottom line
#What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether the Employment and Labour Relations Court has jurisdiction over a dispute involving a church minister who is paid a stipend, given the alleged absence of an employment relationship
- 2.Whether the 1st claimant, an unincorporated registered society, has locus standi to sue through its trustees and Presiding Bishop
- 3.Whether the respondent was served with the letter of transfer dated 1 August 2023, the notice to show cause and the suspension letter
- 4.Whether an employer may transfer an employee without consultation, and whether the transfer was unlawful for want of a hearing or for discriminatory considerations of gender and health status
Key legal issues
#Jurisdiction of the ELRC over a church minister paid a stipend
The relationship between the respondent and the church is an employment relationship; the court has jurisdiction
The respondent was appointed as a minister under a defined letter, her duties were controlled by the church constitution and standing orders, statutory dues (KRA, NSSF, NHIF) were remitted for her, and the circular fixing a minimum stipend speaks to employment rather than a commercial enterprise. Transfers, suspension and discipline are incidents of employment, so the dispute falls within Section 12 of the ELRC Act as construed by the Supreme Court in Kenya Tea Growers Association.
Locus standi of the 1st claimant, an unincorporated society
An unincorporated registered society cannot sue in its own name but may sue through its officials/trustees
The 1st claimant is registered under Section 10 of the Societies Act and is not a legal person. Following Pentecostal Fellowship in Kenya v Kenya Commercial Bank, it sues through its officials; here the trustees are registered custodians and the Presiding Bishop, elected at the 58th Annual Conference, heads its operations. The respondent's assertion that the claimant is wrongly enjoined therefore fails.
Service of the transfer, show-cause and suspension letters
Service was proved; the respondent cannot deny having received the transfer letter
Rev. Salati's evidence that he ensured the respondent was served was not materially challenged. More decisively, in her Replying Affidavit to the application dated 19 October 2023, the respondent admitted being served with the letter of transfer, contesting only its timing relative to the Conference. She cannot resile from that admission. She also made no response to the notice to show cause or to her suspension.
Validity of the transfer without consultation and alleged discrimination
The transfer was valid; the respondent's refusal without communication of her inability to move was gross insubordination
An employer has the prerogative to transfer employees, subject to reasonable notice. The respondent's oath of office committed her to work anywhere as allocated by the Presiding Bishop. Her assertion of prior blanket consultation was implausible. Though she raised pregnancy, school-going children and alleged gender/health discrimination in her affidavit, there was no communication of inability to the claimants and no effort since 1 August 2023 to take up the transfer.
Legal principles established
#- The categories of employment relationships under the Employment Act and Section 12(1) of the ELRC Act are not exhaustive; disputes connected with employment fall within the ELRC's jurisdiction
- An employer has the prerogative to transfer its employees subject to reasonable notice
Court orders
#- 1.A permanent injunction issued against the respondent from referring or representing herself as the Circuit Minister for the Methodist Church in Kenya Delta Circuit, Singwaya Synod
- 2.A restraining order against the respondent from interfering in any way with the management and running of the church services of the Methodist Church in Kenya, Delta Circuit
- 3.A restraining order against the respondent, her servants, employees or any person working at her behest from preventing the new Superintendent Minister posted in the Delta Circuit from performing his duties, including denying him access to the ministers' office, withholding materials, office equipment or information
- 4.Each party to bear its costs
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Section 12 of the Employment and Labour Relations Act; Article 162(2) constitutional jurisdiction over employment and labour relations
Relief refused
#Interest on costs of the suit
The court granted the injunctions but on costs chose that each party bear its own costs; interest was not granted
Costs
Each party to bear its costs
Quotable passages
#Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.
The court is clothed with the requisite jurisdiction to address the claim herein.
Even where the payment is called a stipend, the circular stating a minimum subject to enhancement by each Circuit speaks to an employment relationship and not a commercial enterprise.
the preamble's expression 'connected purposes' should be construed to mean any dispute connected with employment and labour relations.
Ordinarily, an employer has the prerogative to transfer its employees, oficers and managers as held in Gichuru v Package Insurance Brokers Ltd [2021] KESC 12 (KLR) and Mutegi v Chief Executive Oficer, Kenya Development Leather Council & another [2024] KEELRC 1447 (KLR).
Accordingly, the claim is hereby found with merit, and the following orders are hereby issued;
A permanent injunction is issued against the respondent from referring or representing herself as the Circuit Minister for the Methodist Church in Kenya Delta Circuit, Singwaya Synod.
As Ministers serving under the 1st claimant, each party to bear its costs.
Issues in the judgment
#Internal inconsistency on the date of the Conference relevant to the transfer letter
Judgment earlier states the 2nd claimant was elected at the 58th Annual Assembly held 19–22 July 2023, but later references a Conference from 19 to 22 July 2024
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Methodist Church in Kenya Trustees Registered & another v Maso (Cause E005 of 2023) [2025] KEELRC 1096 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/1096/eng@2025-04-03
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.