Public Transport Operators Workers Union of Kenya v Aramex Kenya Limited & 2 others [2018] KEELRC 981 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Employment and Labour Relations Court dismissed a preliminary objection because it relied on disputed facts, not pure points of law.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the preliminary objection against the Claimant was sustainable
It was not, because it rested on factual questions of the Claimant's name and registration status
The court applied the Mukhisa Biscuit principle that a preliminary objection must rest on pure points of law and not on disputed facts. Determining whether the Claimant's name was correct and whether it was registered would require production and testing of evidence, such as the certificate of registration attached by the Claimant. The objection was therefore misconceived and was dismissed with costs in the cause.
Legal principles established
#- A preliminary objection cannot be upheld where the matter raised requires evidence to be established
Court orders
#- 1.The Preliminary Objection dated 28/2/2018 is dismissed
- 2.Costs in the cause
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and Labour Relations Court (Procedure) Rules, 2016 (dispute referred to the Court under written law)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Public Transport Operators Workers Union of Kenya v Aramex Kenya Limited & 2 others [2018] KEELRC 981 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2018). Not stated in judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2018/981/eng@2018-10-08
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.