Kenya Local Government Workers Union & another v Sub-County Administrator, Thika [Kiambu County] [2014] KEELRC 400 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Employment Court dismissed a worker's attempt to win extra money because he used the wrong legal procedure and the original award was already fair.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Applicable substantive and procedural law to a pre-2007 termination dispute
The Trade Disputes Act and its pre-2010 Procedure Rules, not the Industrial Court Act 2011 or the 2010 Rules, governed the review application.
The dispute arose from a termination in 1993 and was reported to the Minister in 1997 under the Trade Disputes Act. The Labour Relations Act 2007 (Section 84, Schedule 5) preserved the Trade Disputes Act for such disputes. The 2nd Claimant therefore wrongly invoked the Industrial Court Act 2011 and the Industrial Court (Procedure) Rules 2010; the correct rules were those under Section 58(1) of the Trade Disputes Act existing before 4th May 2010.
Whether the original Award should be disturbed on review
No. The Court exercised its discretion judiciously under Section 15 of the Trade Disputes Act and the Award was fair, lawful and legal.
Section 15 allowed reinstatement or compensation capped at 12 months' salary. The original Court balanced the interests of Employer and Employee, considering the Grievant rendered no labour over 15 years, and granted accumulated salary as adequate redress. It was not obliged to grant additional compensation, terminal dues, costs and interest, and this Court cannot interfere with that discretion.
Procedural defects in the amended notice of review
The amended notice was drawn, signed and filed by a stranger, Mrs. S. Kariuki, whose capacity was never explained.
The 2nd Claimant was not a party to the original claim but a Grievant. After his Union declined to continue representation he was given the chance to amend his application but introduced documents signed by a person whose capacity was unexplained, compounding the defectiveness of the review.
Legal principles established
#- Disputes on termination arising prior to the enactment of the Labour Relations Act 2007 are dealt with in accordance with the Trade Disputes Act.
- Review of an Award under the Trade Disputes Act was available only through rectification under Rule 20 or interpretation under Rule 21, not a general review.
Court orders
#- 1.The application for review is dismissed with no order on the costs
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Section 8 of the repealed Trade Disputes Act Cap 234, the Laws of Kenya; cognizance taken under Section 14[9][e] and [f]
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Kenya Local Government Workers Union & another v Sub-County Administrator, Thika [Kiambu County] [2014] KEELRC 400 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2014). Review Application arising from Industrial Court Award dated 26th September 2008 (dispute referred under Section 8, Trade Disputes Act Cap 234). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2014/400/eng@2014-06-27
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.