Crown v Getari wa Kachuqu (Revision Case No. 22 of 1927)
Observed later treatment
No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.
Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains good law.
AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions—always read the source judgment before relying on it.
Holding
A clerk does not fall within the definition of 'servant' as defined in section 2 of the Employment of Natives Ordinance (Cap. 139). The court set aside the conviction of the accused who had been employed as a clerk, finding that the statutory definition did not encompass clerical work.
Outcome
Conviction set aside and fine repaid
Facts
The accused, Getari wa Kachuqu, was convicted under the Employment of Natives Ordinance. The evidence showed that the accused had been employed as a clerk. The matter came before the court on revision to determine whether the conviction was proper given the nature of the accused's employment.
Issues
- Whether a clerk falls within the definition of 'servant' under section 2 of the Employment of Natives Ordinance (Cap. 139).
Orders
- Conviction set aside.
- Fine ordered to be repaid.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (1)
- Employment of Natives Ordinance (Cap. 139) s.2
Cases cited (1)
- Revision Case No. 43/1927
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.