Wanjiku & 10 others v Chief Registrar of the Judiciary & another (Cause 912 of 2014) (Employment and Labour) [2014] KEIC 2 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The court ruled that Kenyan interns and attachees are not automatically employees, but still awarded each claimant Kshs.70,000 as an ex gratia payment.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the 1st Respondent, Chief Registrar of the Judiciary, was properly sued
The claim lay against the Chief Registrar as an office-holder and not in her personal capacity; the submission that she was sued personally was a misnomer.
The court held the Chief Registrar's role as chief administrator and secretary to the Commission placed her squarely at the centre of the impugned acts, having authored and signed the termination letters. The claim was therefore properly brought against her office. The court found the contrary submission baffling and dismissed it without ceremony.
Whether an employment relationship existed between the claimants and the respondents
No employment relationship existed; the relationship was attachment/internship without a contract of service and was 'amorphous'.
The court reviewed the documentary evidence (attachment, internship and student clerk letters) and statutory definitions of employee, employer and casual employee under the Employment Act, Industrial Training Act and Trade Disputes Act. It found no mutuality of agreement or contract of service, and no room to imply employment, describing the relationship as amorphous and formless.
Whether the termination was unfair, wrongful and unlawful
The issue abated as no employment relationship existed in the first place.
Since unfair termination under sections 41, 43, 44 and 49 of the Employment Act presupposes a contract of service, the claimants' complaint of unlawful summary dismissal could not be sustained once employment was negatived. The court declined to determine the fairness of a termination under a relationship that did not legally exist.
Whether the claimants were entitled to the reliefs sought
The reliefs sought (reinstatement, salaries, gratuity, compensation, constitutional damages) were refused, but the court awarded an ex gratia package to each claimant as the weaker party who contributed to the respondents' labour base.
The claim failed for want of an employment relationship. However, exercising equitable discretion informed by Rika J's jurisprudence on the social dimensions of labour disputes, the court found the claimants were the weaker party who had assisted the respondents' operations, and awarded a token of appreciation and send-off, with further verification of deductions referred to the Commissioner for Labour.
Legal principles established
#- Employment relationships are founded on mutuality of agreement and, ordinarily, a contract of service; references to a worker as casual, clerk or intern do not of themselves confer an employment relationship.
- Courts may adopt a broad, socially-informed approach in employment disputes rather than strict application of law, particularly where a weaker party is involved.
- The Chief Registrar of the Judiciary may be sued as an officer acting on behalf of the Judicial Service Commission and not in personal capacity where the acts impugned are hers in office.
Court orders
#- 1.Award to each Claimant individually of Kshs.50,000.00 as a token of appreciation
- 2.Award to each Claimant individually of Kshs.20,000.00 as send-off
- 3.The Commissioner for Labour ordered to investigate, verify, calibrate, compute and report to the Court on undue deductions, taxation, NSSF and NHIF deductions and entitlements within 60 days of the award
- 4.Respondents ordered to settle and pay the Claimants' dues within 45 days of the orders
- 5.Suit dismissed with each party bearing its own costs
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Original jurisdiction of the Industrial Court under the Constitution (Article 41) and the Employment Act, 2007 over employment and labour disputes
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Wanjiku & 10 others v Chief Registrar of the Judiciary & another (Cause 912 of 2014) (Employment and Labour) [2014] KEIC 2 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2014). Industrial Court Cause (claim filed 30th May 2014; exact cause number not stated in judgment). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keic/2014/2/eng@2014-09-30
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.