Kenya Union Of Entertainment& Music Employers v Vanguard Limited [2013] KEELRC 851 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The Industrial Court dismissed a union's attempt to overturn a payment order, confirming that review is only for narrow legal grounds—not a second chance to re-argue a lost case.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the application met the legal criterion for review
The application failed because none of the Rule 32(1) grounds for review was demonstrated; the application was framed as an appeal against the orders of 24th April 2013
The court held that review lies only on the grounds in Rule 32(1): discovery of new and important matter, error apparent on the face of the record, breach of written law, need for clarification, or other sufficient reasons. The claimant's affidavits were a coterie of facts amounting to an appeal against the orders, which the court cannot entertain, and the claimant admitted awareness of the proceedings from the outset.
Whether the claimant could disown the conduct of the matter by its Assistant Secretary General
The claimant's complaint about Ochieng's authority did not avail it, as the union admitted awareness of the proceedings with the Secretary-General appearing at the onset
The claimant alleged Ochieng lacked authority under its Constitution to represent it or swear the replying affidavit, and that he conspired with the grievants. The court noted the Secretary-General had appeared at the onset of proceedings and questioned why the union did not intervene early. The grievants restated Ochieng's authority.
Supplementary affidavits of Job Mucuha, Godfrey Mwangi and David Kibathi
The prayer to strike out the supplementary affidavits for non-compliance with the leave order was sustained
Counsel for the grievants objected that the supplementary affidavits were filed outside the timelines set in the order granting leave. The court sustained the objection and struck them out.
Legal principles established
#- Review is available only on the grounds set out in Rule 32(1) of the Industrial Court (Practice) Rules 2010, which derives from Order 45 of the Civil Procedure Rules
- An applicant for review who in substance re-litigates the merits, mounting an appellate configuration of issues, has not met the criterion for review
Court orders
#- 1.The Notice of Motion dated 30th March 2013 is dismissed
- 2.Costs of the application awarded to the grievants/Respondents
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Industrial Court (Practice) Rules 2010, Rule 32 (review jurisdiction); Industrial Court original jurisdiction under Cause No. 842 of 2009
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Kenya Union Of Entertainment& Music Employers v Vanguard Limited [2013] KEELRC 851 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2013). Cause No. 842 of 2009. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2013/851/eng@2013-09-26
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.