Kenya Salt Workers Union (Represented by its promoters and applicants) & 6 others v Registrar of Trade Unions; Kenya Chemical Workers Union (Interested Party) (Civil Appeal E028 of 2022) [2025] KECA 119 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Court of Appeal confirmed that a trade union can be refused registration even when the existing union raises no objection.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether the learned Judge erred in concluding that members of the appellant proposed union were adequately represented by the interested party
- 2.Whether the learned Judge erred in finding that the respondent correctly declined to register the proposed union, notwithstanding the absence of any written objection by the existing trade union
- 3.Whether the learned Judge erred in failing to find that the respondent's decision to decline registration of the proposed union amounted to a violation of the constitutional rights of the appellants and other members of the proposed union
Key legal issues
#Effect of absence of written objection by an existing trade union on the Registrar's power to refuse registration
The Registrar is not bound to register a proposed union merely because no written objection was received from the existing union covering the same sector; the objection mechanism only fortifies the Registrar's decision.
The proviso to section 14(1)(d) imposes on the Registrar only an obligation to notify existing unions appearing to represent the same interests and to invite written objections. The substantive requirement remains that no other registered union sufficiently represents the interests sought. The Registrar already possessed the interested party's Constitution, filed on its registration under section 18, and unchallenged evidence showed the interested party had recruited 324 of 600 employees of Krystalline Salt Limited and signed CBAs with Kensalt Ltd. Refusal was therefore legally justified.
Whether refusal of registration violated Articles 36, 41 and 47 of the Constitution
The refusal did not violate the rights to freedom of association or labour relations; the statutory bar on proliferating unions in the same sector is a justifiable limitation under Article 24(1), and the application regime affords applicants sufficient opportunity to be heard for Article 47 purposes.
Following Muiruri, Charles Salano and Kenya Plantation & Agricultural Workers Union, the Court held that regulation of trade union registration, including the requirement that no sufficiently representative union exists, is a reasonable and justifiable limitation in an open and democratic society, aimed at fostering strong unions and industrial stability. On fair administrative action, no objections were in fact received; the respondent evaluated the application in consultation with the National Labour Board, and the statutory process affords applicants multiple opportunities to furnish information.
Nature of the 'appeal' to the ELRC under section 30 of the Labour Relations Act
An 'appeal' against the Registrar's refusal under section 30 of the Labour Relations Act is in substance a judicial review Reference seeking certiorari and mandamus, not an ordinary appeal.
The Court construed the ELRC proceedings as a Reference for judicial review of the Registrar's decision. This framing informed its first-appeal review role, reconsidering the evidence and drawing its own conclusions while according due allowance to the trial judge's advantage, per Peters v Sunday Post and the settled first-appeal principles.
Legal principles established
#- The proviso to section 14(1)(d) of the Labour Relations Act obliges the Registrar only to notify and invite objections from existing unions covering the same interests; the absence of a written objection does not bar the Registrar from refusing registration where an existing union sufficiently represents the interests sought.
- Statutory limitations on the rights to form and join a trade union (Articles 36 and 41) that restrict proliferation of unions in the same sector are reasonable and justifiable limitations under Article 24(1) of the Constitution.
Court orders
#- 1.The appeal is dismissed in its entirety
- 2.No orders as to costs, considering the public nature of the appeal
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
- On appeal from
- Employment and Labour Relations Court at Malindi
- Employment and Labour Relations Appeal No. 1 of 2019
- Jurisdiction invoked
- First appeal to the Court of Appeal from the Employment and Labour Relations Court, the appeal/Reference below having been brought under section 30 of the Labour Relations Act, 2007
Relief refused
#Appellants' prayer to overturn the Registrar's refusal to register the Kenya Salt Workers Union
The Registrar was legally justified in declining registration because the interested party sufficiently represented the interests of workers in the salt sector under section 14(1)(d) of the Labour Relations Act
Costs
Considering the public nature of the appeal, no orders as to costs
Quotable passages
#Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.
All in all, having considered the record of appeal, the grounds on which it is anchored, the rival submissions, the cited authorities and statute law, we reach the inescapable conclusion that the appeal has no merit and is hereby dismissed in its entirety. Considering the public nature of the appeal, we make no orders as to costs.
failure to receive any objections from the existing trade union(s) within the prescribed period does not of itself bar the respondent from addressing the pertinent question as to whether the application satisfies the requirement set out in section 14(1) (d) of the Act.
the learned Judge cannot be faulted for holding that provisions of the Act that imposed limitations on the appellants’ rights under Articles 36 and 41 of the Constitution were well-intentioned and compliant with the conditions set out under Article 24(1) of the Constitution.
the word “appeal” must be construed as a Reference seeking orders of certiorari and mandamus pursuant to section 30 of the Labour Relations Act, 2007 and not in the sense of an appeal from a subordinate court.
It must be borne in mind, though, that the proviso to section 14(1) (d) of the Act only imposes an obligation on the respondent to notify any existing trade union that appears to represent the same interests as the applicants of the receipt of the application, and to invite such trade union(s) to submit in writing any objections to the registration
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Kenya Salt Workers Union (Represented by its promoters and applicants) & 6 others v Registrar of Trade Unions; Kenya Chemical Workers Union (Interested Party) (Civil Appeal E028 of 2022) [2025] KECA 119 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Employment and Labour Relations Appeal (Court of Appeal) arising from ELRC Appeal No. 1 of 2019. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2025/119/eng@2025-02-07
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.