Mekubo v Vivo Energy Kenya Limited (Cause 867 of 2017) [2025] KEELRC 683 (KLR)
The bottom line
#What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether an employer-employee relationship existed between the Claimant and the Respondent
No such relationship existed; the Claimant was an employee of Tropical Focus (K) Limited outsourced to the Respondent
The Claimant produced no employment contract with the Respondent. The Respondent produced uncontroverted contracts of employment (2011, 2015, 2016) between the Claimant and Tropical Focus (K) Limited, leave forms on Tropical Focus letterheads, and a warning letter from Tropical Focus, showing control lay with Tropical Focus. The Authorization to Drive Certificate and time sheets showed only task allocation and accountability, not employment. The outsourcing arrangement was a triangular work engagement.
Whether the Claimant was unfairly terminated
The issue was not determined as it became academic
Having found no employment relationship with the Respondent, and Tropical Focus (K) Limited not being a party to the suit, the court held it would be an academic exercise to determine unfair termination, since the alleged termination could only be assessed against the actual employer.
Whether the Claimant deserved the reliefs sought
No relief was awarded; the entire claim was dismissed
All reliefs hinged on proof of an employment relationship with the Respondent. That having failed, none of the heads of claim - notice pay, house allowance, underpayments, PAYE refunds, severance, compensation or a certificate of service - could issue against the Respondent.
Legal principles established
#- An employer-employee relationship is established by selection and engagement of the employee, proof of payment of wages, power of dismissal and power to control the employee's conduct
- Time sheets showing attendance at a client's premises are an accountability instrument and do not of themselves prove an employment relationship with the client
- Employment relationships can take a triangular/outsourcing model where the owner of the work does not directly employ the worker
Court orders
#- 1.Dismissal of the Claimant's claim
- 2.No orders as to costs
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Article 162(2)(a) of the Constitution / Employment and Labour Relations Court Act (Employment and Labour Relations Cause)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Mekubo v Vivo Energy Kenya Limited (Cause 867 of 2017) [2025] KEELRC 683 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Employment and Labour Relations Cause (Nairobi), Statement of Claim dated 9th May 2017. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/683/eng@2025-03-06
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.