Jane Wanjiku Mwangi v John Mwangi Nderitu [2021] KEELRC 1005 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court ruled that a caretaker paid commission on rent collected was a commission agent, not an employee, so her employment claims failed.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Nature of the relationship between the claimant and the respondent
The claimant was a commission agent, not an employee
In the absence of an express agreement, the court had recourse to the parties' conduct. The claimant collected rent, reported incidents at the premises, and was referred to as a caretaker, but she was always paid commission on monies collected and never a salary. Despite being called a caretaker, her conduct pointed to that of a commission agent, who is not an employee.
Whether the claimant is entitled to the remedies sought
No entitlement to employment-related remedies absent an employment relationship
Having found no employer-employee relationship, the remedies claimed - salary arrears, house allowance and leave - could not accrue. Any claim would have been for commission, which was not pleaded, so the claim failed in its entirety.
Legal principles established
#- A contract may be inferred from the conduct of the parties even where no words were used
- A commission agent is paid a commission and not a salary, and is not an employee
Court orders
#- 1.The claim is dismissed with costs to the respondent
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and labour relations jurisdiction, contested on the basis that no employer-employee relationship existed
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Jane Wanjiku Mwangi v John Mwangi Nderitu [2021] KEELRC 1005 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2021). Not stated in the judgment as provided. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2021/1005/eng@2021-09-21
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.