Lawrence Nyaguti Ochieng & 7 others v Union of Kenya Civil Servants & 3 others [2015] KEELRC 129 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court froze a civil servants' union's bank accounts to protect its funds, but refused to suspend its officials because the evidence wasn't strong enough yet.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether to suspend the 2nd and 3rd Respondents under Section 47(1)(b) of the Labour Relations Act
Suspension refused for lack of prima facie evidence at the interlocutory stage
The Court acknowledged its statutory power to suspend officials who misappropriate union funds, but found the allegations of misappropriation, over-expenditure and concealment of the KRA tax demand were serious criminal-type allegations unsupported by prima facie evidence. Such powers must be exercised with caution and fair play, so suspension could not be granted at the interlocutory stage on the material presented.
Whether the Court should freeze the Union's bank accounts
Account freezes granted because of serious financial management challenges within the Union
Although suspension of the officials was refused, the Court was persuaded that serious financial management challenges existed, including unremitted PAYE of Kshs.90,134,760 and over-expenditure of about Kshs.13 million. To preserve the Union's assets pending full hearing, withdrawals from the three identified accounts were prohibited, with a mechanism for essential payments on judicial order.
Validity of the NEB resolution convening the SNDC
The Respondents deponed that the resolutions were valid after the Deputy Chairman took over the chair; the Court made no adverse finding on this as the SNDC had already occurred
The Respondents explained that the National Chairman was stopped from chairing the NEB meeting by members who doubted his impartiality under Article 8(1) of the Union Constitution, and that his deputy constitutionally deputised him. The resolutions of 16th October 2015 were therefore said to be valid, and the SNDC had already taken place, rendering that limb partly spent.
Legal principles established
#- The Industrial Court is statutorily empowered to order delivery of misappropriated trade union property and to suspend officials who contravene Section 47(1)(a) of the Labour Relations Act
- The powers under Section 47(1)(b) must be exercised with caution and only on prima facie evidence
- Restraining orders against a trade union are aimed at preserving, not crippling, the union
Court orders
#- 1.Withdrawals from Bank Account Number 01120120993000 in the name of Union of Kenya Civil Servants held at the Cooperative Bank of Kenya are prohibited pending further orders
- 2.Withdrawals from Bank Account Number 01021003208800 in the name of Union of Kenya Civil Servants held at the National Bank of Kenya are prohibited pending further orders
- 3.Withdrawals from the Bank Account in the name of Union of Kenya Civil Servants held at Elimu Sacco Society Limited are prohibited pending further orders
- 4.Essential payments may be made from the aforesaid Bank Accounts by order of any of the Judges of this Court
- 5.The main claim shall be heard on priority basis
- 6.The costs of the application shall be in the cause
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Section 47 of the Labour Relations Act
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Later judgments citing this (1)
#Judgments in the corpus that rely on this one. Where the Court said how it treated the authority, that is shown.
- Kenya National Union of Nurses v Eco Bank Kenya Limited & 8 others [2020] KEELRC 1544 (KLR)[2020] KEELRC 1544 (KLR)21 Feb 2020
Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Lawrence Nyaguti Ochieng & 7 others v Union of Kenya Civil Servants & 3 others [2015] KEELRC 129 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2015). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2015/129/eng@2015-12-04
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.