Geoffrey Mareko & 4 others v National General Secretary,Dock Workers Union & another [2015] KEELRC 496 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Industrial Court dismissed a bid to overturn a Dock Workers Union conference, ruling courts should not interfere with unions' internal democratic decisions without strong evidence.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Validity of the notice convening the Conference of 18th October 2014
The misdescription of the meeting as an Annual Conference was an error without prejudice, corrected by the circular of 10th October 2014; parties were never in doubt it was a Special Conference
The Court found the first notice described the meeting as an Annual Conference in error; the subsequent circular of 10th October 2014 clarified it was a Special Conference, in accord with the Ruling in Cause 348 of 2014. The 5th Claimant conceded a Special Conference has the powers of an Annual Conference under the same rules, so the confusion did not affect proceedings or outcome.
Quorum and representativeness of the Claimants' challenge
The Claimants failed to establish lack of quorum or that they represented disaffected Members
The Claimants gave no specifics of the required quorum or numbers present; Mareko's reference to 'my People' counting attendees was unsupported by documents. The Respondents produced over 2,000 signed forms of Members wishing to sever COTU-K affiliation, uncontradicted. The Court was unconvinced the Claimants spoke for a good number of Members.
Effect of registration of the new Constitution by the Registrar of Trade Unions
The Court cannot invalidate the Special Conference outcome without hearing the Registrar, and no appeal under Section 30 of the Labour Relations Act was filed
The Union filed notices under Section 27 of the Labour Relations Act and the Registrar issued a certificate of change of Constitution. Invalidating the Conference would amount to judging the Registrar's decision without hearing him, and would effectively be a judgment under Section 30 although no appeal against registration was filed. The new Constitution has taken effect.
Multiplicity of claims and judicial restraint
Three claims were aimed at stalling a democratic process; courts should not reverse union resolutions for minor infractions
The Court noted the same parties and law firm had filed Causes 218, 348 and 532 of 2014, all aimed at stalling conferences. The Union's internal dispute resolution mechanism was never invoked. Constant judicial intervention destabilises unions, especially where litigants' self-interest is at variance with the democratic will of many Members.
Legal principles established
#- Courts should exercise restraint in interfering with the internal democratic processes of trade unions
- Trade unions and their members enjoy freedom of association under the Labour Relations Act and Articles 36 and 41 of the Constitution
- Amendments to a union constitution take effect upon registration by the Registrar of Trade Unions
Court orders
#- 1.The Claim is dismissed with costs to the Respondents
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Industrial Court [Procedure] Rules 2010, Rule 27 [1] [a] (trade union dispute under 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.
- Dock Workers Union (K) v Mohamed Sheria & 2 others; Barclays Bank of Kenya Limited (Interested Party) [2021] KEELRC 1021 (KLR)[2021] KEELRC 1021 (KLR)16 Sept 2021
Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Geoffrey Mareko & 4 others v National General Secretary,Dock Workers Union & another [2015] KEELRC 496 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2015). Cause Number 532 of 2014. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2015/496/eng@2015-10-02
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.