Nicky Njuguna & 3 others v Registrar Of Trade Unions & another [2015] KEELRC 834 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Employment Court dismissed the Kenya Police Union promoters' bid to force the Registrar of Trade Unions to issue their registration certificate, ruling the proper route was their existing appeal.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Proper forum for challenging the Registrar of Trade Unions' exercise of administrative powers under section 12 of the Labour Relations Act
Challenges lie by way of appeal to the Industrial Court under section 28(5) of the Labour Relations Act, not judicial review
The court held that section 12 of the Labour Relations Act sets out steps for registration and requires the Registrar to issue a certificate or notice of rejection within 30 days. Aggrieved applicants may appeal under section 28(5) to the National Labour Court, being the Court established under the Labour Institutions Act, now the Employment and Labour Relations Court under Article 162. The court relied on its prior decision in Appeal No. 7 of 2011 (KEFHAU v Registrar of Trade Unions & KPAWU) to reject the respondent's submission that mandamus by judicial review was the proper route, noting labour relations actors have deliberately separate dispute resolution procedures.
Whether the present application could circumvent the pending appeal
No - the orders sought had already been addressed in the Memorandum of Appeal dated 5th March 2007 and the application was an attempt to revisit that appeal
The court found that by filing the Memorandum of Appeal on 5th March 2007 the applicants had already effectively challenged the decision or lack of decision of the Registrar under section 12 of the Labour Relations Act, and the ruling of 14th June 2013/2014 dealt with the refusal to register the Kenya Police Union. Seeking a certificate to promote the proposed Union via a fresh application would revisit the appeal already on record. Piecemeal litigation of the refusal would defeat the essence of the Memorandum of Appeal. The application was therefore dismissed with each party bearing their own costs.
Enforcement of the Court's orders of 14th June 2013 against the Registrar
The mode of enforcement adopted by the applicants was procedurally wrong
The court acknowledged there was a ruling and order of 14th June 2013 against the Registrar and that an appeal against it was pending before the Court of Appeal (Nairobi Civil Appeal No. 251 of 2014) without a stay. However, it held that enforcement of Court orders is regulated in law, and the applicants had not employed the proper procedure; the present application was therefore not a valid means of enforcing the ruling and orders.
Legal principles established
#- Any aggrieved party by a decision of the Registrar of Trade Unions in the exercise of administrative roles under the Labour Relations Act appeals to the Industrial Court (Employment and Labour Relations Court), not by judicial review.
- A refusal to register a union or issue a certificate of registration or promotion cannot be dealt with piecemeal in different applications outside the appeal already filed.
- Execution of Court orders is regulated in law and cannot be enforced through an application of the kind brought by the applicants.
Court orders
#- 1.Application dated 28th July 2014 is dismissed
- 2.Each party shall bear their own costs
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Articles 24, 41, 165(5)(h) and 162(2)(a) of the Constitution; section 12(2) of the Industrial Court Act
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Nicky Njuguna & 3 others v Registrar Of Trade Unions & another [2015] KEELRC 834 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2015). Application dated 28th July 2014 (in Appeal filed 5th March 2007). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2015/834/eng@2015-06-10
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.