Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCDismissedCause No. 216 of 2015· [2016] KEELRC 828 (KLR)

Cornelius Kiprotich Rop v Rachel Jemeli Singoei [2016] KEELRC 828 (KLR)

Employment & Labour Relations Court of Kenya
19 July 2016
DMD. K. Njagi Marete
1,765 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~7 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

The Employment Court dismissed a farm worker's Sh1.4 million claim because he could not prove an employment relationship actually existed.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The claimant, Cornelius Kiprotich Rop, sued Rachel Jemeli Singoei claiming that she employed him as a Farm Manager at her Jua Kali, Uasin Gishu farm from 21st November 2011 at a salary of Kshs.18,980/- excluding house allowance, and that she summarily, unlawfully and unfairly terminated his services without notice, a written contract, or payment of wages and overtime. He sought a declaration of unfair termination, Kshs.1,413,042/- in various heads (one month's notice pay, service pay, overtime, unpaid wages for 25 months, and 12 months' compensation for unfair termination), a certificate of service, costs and interest. The respondent totally denied ever employing the claimant, asserting the relationship was familial and charitable: she had fostered the claimant and his siblings (her nieces and nephews) following his brother's family breakup, and sent money for school fees via Western Union. She further contended that at the alleged date of employment the claimant was in Form three and had no National ID. The court framed four issues, the threshold one being whether an employment relationship existed. Applying the balance of probabilities, the court found the claimant's pleaded date of employment 'curious and revealing' since he was in school at the time, and found as a fact that no employment existed. All other issues fell away. The claim was dismissed with costs to the respondent on 19th July 2016.

Key legal issues

#
01

Existence of an employment relationship

Holding

The court found that no employment relationship existed between the claimant and the respondent

Reasoning

The claimant alleged he was employed as a Farm Manager from 21st November 2011. The respondent denied ever employing him, asserting she had fostered him and his siblings out of charity, and that at the alleged date of employment he was still in school in Form three and without a National ID. On the balance of probabilities, the court found the claimant's account implausible given the dates and the familial/charitable context, and found no employment.

p. 5
02

Entitlement to relief for unfair termination

Holding

Having found no employment, none of the consequential reliefs (notice pay, service pay, overtime, unpaid wages, 12 months' compensation, certificate of service) were available

Reasoning

All the reliefs claimed were premised on the existence of an employment relationship governed by the Employment Act, 2007. Since the foundational issue of employment was resolved against the claimant, the court held that the remaining issues fell away and were not worthy of consideration, and the entire claim was dismissed with costs.

p. 5

Legal principles established

#
  • On a claim of employment, the claimant bears the burden of proving the employment relationship on a balance of probabilities; where the evidence does not support employment, ancillary claims for unfair termination fall away

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The claim is dismissed with costs to the respondent

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Constitution of Kenya, 2010Articles 28, 29, 41
  • Employment Act, 2007Sections 27(1), 35(1)(b), 36, 41, 45(2)(a), 51
  • Labour Institutions ActSection 15(1)

Cases cited (1)

  • Moses Kaunda Mono Vs CMC Motors
    Cause 192 of 2013
Jurisdiction invoked
Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction under Article 162(2) of the Constitution (employment and labour relations dispute)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Cornelius Kiprotich Rop v Rachel Jemeli Singoei [2016] KEELRC 828 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2016). Cause No. 216 of 2015. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2016/828/eng@2016-07-19

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.