Kenya Revenue Authority & 2 othera v Registrar of Trade Unions & 3 others [2016] KEELRC 173 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Employment and Labour Relations Court upheld the Registrar's refusal to register KEREVU because the union failed to prove it offered anything distinct from the existing union.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Compliance with form and procedure of the registration application
The application complied with sections 12, 13 and 14(1)(a), (b) and (c) of the Labour Relations Act, 2007
The Registrar raised no issue with the form of the application. The court was satisfied the union had recruited the requisite members, obtained a certificate from the Registrar, applied within six months of the certificate, adopted a compliant constitution and had a registered office and postal address.
Whether the appellants received a fair hearing
Yes; the Registrar complied with the requirements of due process, and failure to hold an oral hearing did not negate the process
Following Maureen Onyango J. in Munir Masound, the court held it is sufficient that the Registrar gazettes the application, invites objections, serves them on the applicant, allows written representations, refers the matter to the National Labour Board and communicates the decision timeously. The appellant received the objections and made written submissions.
Whether the reasons for refusal were sound in fact and law
Yes; the Registrar did not err, since the appellants did not prove a peculiar sectoral advantage over BIFU under section 14(2) of the Labour Relations Act
Applying Seth Panyako, the court held the burden lay on the applicant to show suitable sectoral provisions under section 14(2). The representations and the appellant's constitution disclosed no peculiar sectoral advantage vis-a-vis BIFU. The Registrar's reference to the pending Civil Appeal No. 255 of 2010 was a reasonable relevant factor, and refusal did not violate Article 41(2)(c).
Legal principles established
#- It is sufficient due process for the Registrar to gazette the intended registration, invite and serve objections, allow written representations, refer the matter to the National Labour Board, and communicate the decision timeously; an oral hearing is not required
- The onus of proving suitable provisions to protect and promote the respective sectoral interests of employees rests on the applicant union on a balance of probability
Court orders
#- 1.The appeal is dismissed
- 2.No order as to costs since the matter dealt with an issue of great public interest
- On appeal from
- Registrar of Trade Unions
- Notice of refusal dated 2nd October 2014
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Appeal under section 20 of the Labour Relations Act, 2007 against refusal of registration of a trade union
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Kenya Revenue Authority & 2 othera v Registrar of Trade Unions & 3 others [2016] KEELRC 173 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2016). Appeal dated 3rd November 2014 (Industrial Court appeal against refusal of trade union registration). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2016/173/eng@2016-11-25
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.