Employment and Labour Relations Court
Search tips: "exact phrase" · -exclude · land | property · negligen* · citations like [2023] KEHC 123
Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations CourtPetitions
Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations CourtPetitions
The petitioner, a County Assembly established under Article 176 and 177 of the Constitution, challenged the respondent (Independent Constitutional Commission)’s circulars that demoted County Assembly members from job grade D5 to D4 and reduced their benefits. The court found the petition meets the competence threshold under the reasonable precision test. The court declared the circulars unconstitutional as they violated Articles 10, 27(1)(2)(3)(4), and 47 of the Constitution by unilaterally demoting members without due process and reducing benefits, and quashed the circulars. The court also held the respondent did not fail to approve Non-practicing Allowance as it followed constitutional principles and existing regulations.
Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations CourtPetitions
The court considered a motion filed by a petitioner seeking urgent certification, suspension of deployment from Mai Mahiu Traffic Sub-Base to Maganda Police Station, prohibition on interference with duties, contempt penalties for the Deputy Inspector General, and costs. The motion arose from the petitioner's claim that repeated deployments post-2021 court order breached constitutional rights and regulations. The court noted the 2021 judgment quashed a specific transfer but did not grant immunity from future deployments, and the petitioner's selective enforcement of the order after the judgment was criticized. The court found the motion should be allowed as the petitioner's recent deployments constituted contempt of the 2021 decree, but the case was later marked as fully settled after a settlement agreement was reached.
Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations CourtPetitions
The court dismissed the respondent's motion for urgent orders, including setting aside ex-parte orders and granting leave to respond, as the applicant was duly served with the Notice of Motion on 23rd January 2025 via email and phone number, and the orders were not made without opportunity to be heard. The court found the applicant's claims of constitutional breach and privacy violation unfounded, as the service methods were valid under Rule 28(1) of the ELRC Procedure Rules, 2024, and the applicant failed to attend court despite being served.
Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations CourtPetitions
The court found that the petitioner's petition met the competence threshold for constitutional pleading, as it clearly identified the violated constitutional rights (Articles 28, 35, 41, 47) and the manner of violation (failure to comply with section 22 of the Work Injury Benefit Act). The court declared that the respondents violated the petitioner's constitutional rights to dignity, right to information, fair labour practices, and fair administrative action by failing to report the occupational accident death to the Directorate of Occupational Safety and Health services and provide the required notice. The court ordered a declaration of violation, compensation of Kshs.700,000 for constitutional violations, and costs with interest, declining the claim for service pay due to the deceased's NSSF contributions.
Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations CourtPetitions
The court addressed a petition by employees alleging constitutional violations by the 1st respondent (Kenya Forest Service) for failing to promote them despite qualifications. The petitioners claimed the 2023 recruitment ad for Inspector Cadets violated HR policies and the Constitution by excluding them from internal promotions. The court found the petitioners proved the respondent violated its own HR Policy Manual (section 2.34) by not exhausting internal recruitment before advertising externally, constituting unfair labour practices under Article 41. The court granted a declaration of violation but dismissed other reliefs due to insufficient evidence on discrimination and policy compliance.
Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations CourtPetitions
The court heard motions from the petitioner seeking urgent certification, temporary suspension of the respondents' decision to place them on compulsory leave, and orders restraining respondents from ejecting or impeding their occupation of the Clerk-Isiolo County office. The respondents opposed the motions, claiming the petitioner's applications were frivolous and lacked jurisdiction. The court granted the motions as the parties agreed to consolidate the motions, and the respondents' objections were dismissed due to the urgency and compromise reached.
Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations CourtPetitions
The petitioner, a trade union representing ECDE teachers, sought declarations and orders against respondents (Murang’a County Assembly, Public Service Board, and others) alleging failure to implement the Salaries and Remuneration Commission’s advisory on ECDE teachers’ remuneration. The court dismissed the petition, finding the petitioner failed to prove the respondents breached constitutional or statutory obligations, and the SRC’s advice was binding on county governments as per prior court rulings. The court held the petition was premature, violated the collective bargaining process, and lacked sufficient evidence to establish legal violations.
Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations CourtPetitions
The court dismissed the respondent's Notice of Preliminary Objection to the petition, finding that the cause of action is not time-barred due to the respondent's failure to comply with statutory forms under the Work Injury Benefits Act (WIBA), the petition does not offend the doctrine of constitutional avoidance as it seeks to compel statutory compliance, and the petition does not violate the exhaustion doctrine as it functions as a holding suit to enforce statutory obligations. The court ruled that the respondent's failure to fill the DOSH form constitutes a continuing injury, and the petition is valid for compelling compliance with statutory processes.
Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations CourtPetitions
The Kenyan High Court considered a constitutional petition filed by a Kirinyaga County Assembly Member challenging KICOWASCO's recruitment of 22 employees. The petitioner alleged constitutional violations (Articles 10 and 174), breaches of Mwongozo Guidelines, Public Finance Management Act, and WASREB regulations due to unremitted supplier bills and pensions, lack of budgetary appropriation, and failure to involve the public. The respondents argued the recruitment followed constitutional and statutory procedures, with vacancies advertised per the County Government Act after Board approval. The court found the petition failed the competence threshold for constitutional petitions as it did not sufficiently detail the alleged constitutional violations and procedural improprieties. The court dismissed the petition with costs, ruling it was overtaken by events and lacked legal and factual foundation.
Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations CourtPetitions
The petitioner challenged the 1st respondent's actions of deploying and demoting them from Chief Principal at Manyatta Technical and Vocational College to Senior Principal at Jeremiah Nyaga National Polytechnic on 12th-18th September 2024, alleging unconstitutional transfer, demotion, threats, and violations of constitutional rights under Articles 23, 27, 41, 47, and 232(a) of the Constitution. The court granted a conservatory order pending determination of the petition, with the respondents arguing the case was premature due to failure to exhaust internal appeal under Section 74 of the PSC Act, while the petitioner asserted the PSC internal appeal mechanism was inapplicable for human rights violations and the transfer was arbitrary and unconstitutional.
Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations CourtPetitions
The petitioners, 47 Enforcement Officers employed by Embu County Government from 2013 to 31 October 2023 under fixed-term contracts, sought conversion to permanent and pensionable terms after their contracts lapsed on 31 October 2023. They alleged constitutional violations (Articles 2, 10, 19, 20, 22, 27, 41, 47, 50, 73, 174) and fair labour practice breaches, claiming legitimate expectation for renewal based on past renewals and a supervisor's 2016 recommendation. The respondents argued the contracts lapsed by effluxion of time, the petition was premature under the exhaustion doctrine (section 77 of the County Government Act), and the dispute should have been appealed to the Public Service Commission. The court granted interim orders restraining removal from payroll but dismissed the petition for lack of merits, finding the contracts lapsed and the petitioners failed to meet the exhaustion doctrine exception threshold.
Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations CourtPetitions
The court determined that the petition was overtaken by events due to the 2024 judgment in Petition E012 of 2023 which reinstated the substantive clerk to the position of Clerk of the County Assembly of Laikipia. This rendered the judicial reliefs sought by the petitioners moot, as the appointment of the acting clerk was no longer relevant following the reinstatement of the substantive clerk. The court found that the petitioners failed to establish the necessary legal basis for the reliefs and that the respondents' actions did not constitute a constitutional violation given the reinstatement of the substantive clerk.
Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations CourtPetitions
The court dismissed the petition for judicial review seeking to quash the establishment and advertisement of the Deputy Clerk Administrative Services position in Laikipia County Assembly. The Petitioner claimed the decision contravened constitutional provisions and county laws by creating a duplicate position where one Deputy Clerk already existed, but the court found the Respondents followed due process under the County Governments Act and County Assembly Service Act, with the position established through a competitive recruitment process that did not overlap with existing roles. The court held the petitioners failed to prove constitutional violations or demonstrate the required legal basis for quashing the decision.
Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations CourtPetitions
The court dismissed the respondent's preliminary objection to the petition, finding that the petition did not violate the doctrine of constitutional avoidance. The respondent argued that the petition was a civil claim under the Employment Act and Work Injuries Benefits Act (WIBA) that could be resolved through statutory forums, but the court held that the petitioner's claim involved constitutional rights under Articles 27, 28, 41, and 47 of the Constitution, specifically the right to fair labour practices and fair administrative action. The court cited the Nairobi ELRC Petition E073 of 2023 (Boniface Orubia Wasika v Cadell Construction Co) where the court determined that enforcing statutory obligations under WIBA could constitute a constitutional issue if the employer's failure to comply violated fundamental rights. The court concluded that the petition was not a mere contractual dispute but involved constitutional rights warranting judicial determination.
Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations CourtPetitions
The court dismissed the respondent's preliminary objection to the petition, ruling that the petition does not constitute a mere civil claim under the Employment Act or Work Injury Benefits Act (WIBA) but involves constitutional violations under Articles 27, 28, 41, and 47 of the Constitution, specifically the right to fair labour practices and fair administrative action. The court found that the employer's failure to comply with WIBA provisions constitutes a violation of constitutional rights, warranting jurisdiction under the High Court despite the doctrine of constitutional avoidance, as established in Boniface Orubia Wasika v Cadell Construction Co (2023). The court held that the petition addresses the employer's conduct in failing to voluntarily submit to WIBA, not compensation for injury, and thus the preliminary objection was without merit.
Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations CourtPetitions
The court reviewed an application to set aside a consent order entered on 28 July 2023, which purported to amend the judgment from 2015. The application alleged misrepresentation by respondents' counsel, failure to properly advise the first respondent, and inadvertent mistake in entering the consent. The petitioner opposed by claiming the consent was voluntary, fully informed, and the application was an abuse of process. The court found the applicant did not meet the legal threshold under Rule 33 of the ELRC Procedure Rules 2016 to review the consent order, as there was no evidence of misrepresentation, fraud, or mistake that would justify setting aside the contract. The court dismissed the motion with costs, noting the consent order was entered voluntarily by the county secretary based on information from counsel.
Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relations CourtPetitions
The court considered an application to set aside a consent order entered on 28 July 2023, which purported to amend the judgment from 2015. The applicant claimed the consent order was entered due to misrepresentation and non-disclosure by the respondent's counsel, leading to a mistake by the county secretary. The court found the applicant failed to demonstrate sufficient grounds under Rule 33 of the ELRC Procedure Rules 2016 for review, as the consent order was voluntarily entered with full knowledge and the applicant did not prove misrepresentation or fraud. The court dismissed the motion with costs, noting the county secretary's role as a senior officer who voluntarily followed counsel's instructions.