Kenya Council of Employment and Migration Agencies v Kenya Literature Bureau & 3 others [2016] KEELRC 636 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Employment Court ruled you can sue the Government for an injunction under the Constitution, but declined to halt Kenya Literature Bureau's operations pending trial.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Constitutionality of section 16 of the Government Proceedings Act barring injunctions against the Government
The preliminary objection based on section 16(2) fails because the statutory bar on injunctions against the Government is inconsistent with article 23(3) of the Constitution, which permits appropriate relief including injunction in article 22 proceedings, and is to that extent null and void
The court noted that both decisions relied on by the respondents (Royal Media v Telkom Kenya and Chogis Garage) predated the Constitution of 2010. Under the new constitutional dispensation, article 23(3) expressly authorises injunctions in proceedings brought under article 22. The statutory interdiction would deprive a person meriting such an order of a constitutionally provided remedy, creating a conflict resolved in favour of the Constitution. The preliminary objection therefore failed, though the court nonetheless vacated the interim injunction on its own motion on the balance of convenience.
Whether the interim injunction issued on 5th April 2016 should stand pending trial
The interim injunction was vacated on the court's own motion because the balance of convenience favoured allowing the 1st respondent to continue its operations normally, and integrity concerns, if proved, are remediable under article 23(3)
The court held that Kenya Literature Bureau plays a pivotal role in the education sector and must be allowed to carry out its operations; no prejudice would be occasioned to the Petitioner by vacating the injunction. Allegations of integrity violations and malpractice could be submitted to competent authorities for investigation, and the substantive issues raised were reserved for trial of the main petition.
Adequacy of the Petitioner's pleadings
The Petition was badly drafted and unclear on the reliefs sought, but the court indulged the in-person Petitioner and gleaned the substantive reliefs from the prayers
The court criticised the massive reproduction of constitutional and statutory provisions without connection to the matter, observing it was an example of bad drafting. Nevertheless, it discerned three reliefs: urgency certification and conservatory orders, restraint of interference with the Managing Director recruitment process pending vacation of office by the incumbent, and restraint of interference with the current board composition. The court suggested the organisation engage an advocate or draft more coherently in future.
Legal principles established
#- To the extent that section 16 of the Government Proceedings Act bars the grant of injunctions against the Government in proceedings for violation of rights under article 22, it conflicts with article 23(3) of the Constitution and is null and void
- Under article 23(3), a court hearing a petition under article 22 may grant appropriate relief including an injunction against the Government
Court orders
#- 1.The preliminary objection fails
- 2.Section 16 of the Government Proceedings Act is declared, to the extent that it conflicts with the Constitution, null and void
- 3.The injunction orders made on 5th April 2016 are vacated
- 4.The Petition proceeds to trial on merit on a date to be fixed at the Registry
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Articles 22 and 23(3) of the Constitution of Kenya 2010 (petition for enforcement of fundamental rights and freedoms)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Later judgments citing this (2)
#Judgments in the corpus that rely on this one. Where the Court said how it treated the authority, that is shown.
- Muturi & 10 others v Runji & 4 others (Environment and Land Case E011 of 2023) [2025] KEELC 5874 (KLR)[2025] KEELC 5874 (KLR)3 Jul 2025
- Muturi & 10 others v Runji & 4 others (Environment and Land Case E011 of 2023) [2025] KEELC 5874 (KLR)[2025] KEELC 5874 (KLR)3 Jul 2025
Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Kenya Council of Employment and Migration Agencies v Kenya Literature Bureau & 3 others [2016] KEELRC 636 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2016). Not stated in the extract. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2016/636/eng@2016-09-23
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.