Crown v Muganes (Revision Case No. 20A of 1927) [1927] EACA 19 (1 January 1927)

## Before PICKERING, J.

## CROWN

## *v.*

## JOHK MUGANES s/o WACHIRA. · Revision Case 20A/1927.

Employment of Natives Ordinance (Cap. 139), section 2-definition of servant.

*Held* :-That a clerical overseer in charge of an estate is not a. servant as defined in Section Z. · ·

0RDER.-In his Judgment the Magistrate refe1s to the accused as " a Kikuyu clerk ". It would appear that the llccused in fact acted as a kind of clerical overseer having practically the responsible position of being in charge \_of the estate. Visits for supervision were made by a European periodically. It would seem that during this case the Magist,rate lost sigitt of the definition of servant to be found in Cap 139, section 2. Under the contract entered into by the accuoed he did•· not, in my opinion undertake to work as a labourer or as a herdsman, etc. To this contract of service· the· provisions of Cap. 139 had no application. The employ11Jent was simply a common law contract. The Magistrate would seem to have acted under section 45 (1) (a) of the Ordinance. For the reasons given t.hat section h~d no application and the order authorising the complainant to ~it.hhold -Sh. 15 is invalid and is set aside.