Alam v Noorani & 18 others (Employment and Labour Relations Petition E028 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 82 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court

23 January 2025

MNMathews Nduma

2,866 words in judgment

View original judgment Read on Kenya Law Watch case

AI-assisted case brief

·~11 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

Kenya's Employment Court dismissed a worker's multi-million shilling claim because he could not prove he was actually an employee.

What this practically means

Executive summary

The Petitioner, an Indian national residing in Kenya, petitioned the ELRC claiming he was employed by the 1st Respondent, Kaneez Zehra Mohamed Noorani, and her late husband's various companies from October 2006 to November 2023, serving in capacities including General Manager, Finance Officer and Director. He alleged a verbal stoppage of work in November 2023, unpaid salary arrears of Kshs. 14,149,815, non-remittance of statutory dues, retention of his family's passports to coerce unfair separation terms, and violations of constitutional rights against slavery, servitude and forced labour. He sought nineteen reliefs including lifting the corporate veil, declarations of constructive and unfair termination, damages, compensation, service pay, overtime, gratuity and costs on a full indemnity basis. The Respondents denied employment relationships; the 1st Respondent denied owning or running most of the corporate Respondents, while directors of the 6th, 8th, 9th and 12th Respondents deposed that the Petitioner was unknown to them and any services were outsourced and paid per agreed fees. The court framed six issues, the first being whether an employment relationship was proved, which it held was jurisdictional. Applying Section 2 of the Employment Act and the Casmir Nyankuri Nyaberi decision, it found no payslips, no clear evidence of the work performed, and that the documents relied on showed at most acquaintance with the late Noorani, not employment. Finding no employment relationship, the court declined to determine the remaining issues and dismissed the petition with no order as to costs.

Key legal issues

Whether an employment relationship existed between the Petitioner and any or all of the Respondents

Holding

No employment relationship was proved; the petition was dismissed for lack of the jurisdictional foundation of an employment relationship

Reasoning

In the absence of a written contract, the Petitioner had to corroborate his claim with evidence. No payslips were attached; email correspondences lacked specifics on origin; work permits (2010-2014) did not show work done or payment; the ASA-3 document only showed the late Noorani knew the Petitioner as an authorized bank agent, not employment; and the unsigned, undated 'acknowledgement of salary settlement' was of unknown origin. The court applied the principle that a claimant must still prove their case even where the contract is oral.

Legal principles established

An employment relationship is not the same as a work relationship; a claimant must adduce evidence, documentary or viva voce, to corroborate an oral employment contract, and the court must satisfy itself that an employment relationship exists as a jurisdictional prerequisite
The ELRC's jurisdiction over employment matters is limited by the existence of an employment relationship as defined in law, which the court must always satisfy itself on before proceeding

Court orders

1.The Petition before Court is therefore dismissed with no order as to costs.

Authorities

Legislation

Employment ActSection 2 (definitions of employee and employer)
Constitution of Kenya, 2010Articles 2(4) and (5), 19, 20(2), 27, 28, 30, 35(1), 41, 43, 47, 50

Cases cited (1)

Casmir Nyankuri Nyaberi vs Mwakikar Agencies Ltd
2016 eKLR

Jurisdiction invoked: Jurisdiction of the Employment and Labour Relations Court founded on the existence of an employment relationship as defined in law

Key timeline

Practical implications

Frequently asked questions

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Alam v Noorani & 18 others (Employment and Labour Relations Petition E028 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 82 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). . Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/82/eng@2025-01-23

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