Cheruiyot & 6 others v Kericho Water & Sanitation Company Limited(KEWASCO) (Appeal E005 of 2022) [2024] KEELRC 660 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Employment Court confirmed that casual workers cannot claim permanent jobs where the employer cancelled appointment letters before they took effect.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Legality of the conversion contracts of employment
The conversion to permanent and pensionable terms was not validly sanctioned by the Respondent's board, which lacked quorum; the selection criteria were discriminatory; and the letters were recalled before taking effect
The Court re-evaluated the evidence on the first appeal and found the claimants' own witness (the former Managing Director) admitted there was no quorum and no budget approval for the conversion. The criteria for picking the 26 of 47 casuals were unexplained. The letters dated 30th October 2019, to take effect in January 2020, were recalled in November 2019 before crystallising, so no proper contract was illegally revoked.
Disturbance of the trial court's judgment on appeal
The trial magistrate properly considered the evidence rather than the submissions, and no basis existed for interference
The Court reviewed the trial record and evidence of both sides, including RW-1's confirmation that no budget allocation or board resolution existed. Finding the magistrate had considered the evidence adduced in finding illegality, the Court saw no reason to disturb the dismissal of the claim.
Status of the Respondent (private company vs statutory body)
The appeal did not succeed on this ground; the Respondent argued it emanates from LVSWDA created under section 65 of the Water Act, and the appellants' complaint did not alter the outcome
The appellants argued the Respondent is a private limited company lacking the characteristics of a statutory body, while the Respondent contended it is a creature of statute by dint of section 65 of the Water Act. The Court's disposition did not turn on this issue, as the appeal failed on the legality findings.
Legal principles established
#- On a first appeal the court is mandated to re-evaluate the evidence afresh and make its own finding on the same
- A contract tainted by illegality yields no rights capable of protection and courts will not aid its enforcement
Court orders
#- 1.The appeal is dismissed
- 2.No orders of costs - each party to bear their own costs
- On appeal from
- Kericho Magistrates Court
- Employment Cause E020 of 2021 (lead file, with E017, E018, E019, E021, E022 and E023 of 2021)
- Jurisdiction invoked
- First appeal from the Magistrates' Court under the Employment and Labour Relations Court's appellate jurisdiction (Civil Procedure Act section 65 read with the Employment and Labour Relations Court Act); judgment does not cite a specific jurisdictional article
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Cheruiyot & 6 others v Kericho Water & Sanitation Company Limited(KEWASCO) (Appeal E005 of 2022) [2024] KEELRC 660 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2024). Employment Appeal arising from Kericho CM Employment Cause No. E020 of 2021 (lead file) and E017, E018, E019, E021, E022 and E023 of 2021. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2024/660/eng@2024-03-13
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.