Okiya Omtatah Okoiti v National Executive of The Republic & 8 others; University Academic Staff Union & another (Interested parties) [2019] KEELRC 918 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Employment Court kept a petition over hospital board appointments alive, confirming interested parties with a real stake can stay in the case.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Joinder of interested parties
The 1st and 2nd interested parties were properly enjoined as they have an identifiable stake, duty or legal interest in the petition
Rule 2 defines an interested party; Rule 7 allows joinder with leave or on the Court's own motion. The 1st interested party, a trade union of academic staff, would be affected by the Court's orders; the 2nd interested party promotes constitutionalism and implementation of the Constitution, and the petition seeks implementation and interpretation of constitutional provisions. Prior litigation history against a respondent does not diminish a genuine stake.
Jurisdiction over ownership issues
Ownership issues fall outside the Court's jurisdiction but remain as vestigial background and do not require severance or striking out
Parties agreed ownership of the hospital and land falls outside the Court's jurisdiction. However, the Court found the real and predominant dispute concerns the appointments of the Hospital's Board Members and Chief Executive Officer and the applicable law; the ownership matters serve only as background completeness of facts and do not impair jurisdiction. The Hospital, University and land are public.
Power to interpret the Constitution
The ELRC has jurisdiction to interpret the Constitution in matters predominantly within its jurisdiction
Article 10(1)(a) binds all State organs, State officers, public officers and all persons whenever any of them applies or interprets the Constitution. The applicants' argument that constitutional interpretation is reserved for the High Court fails where the predominant dispute falls within the ELRC's jurisdiction under Article 162(2)(a).
Legal principles established
#- A person has standing as an interested party where they have an identifiable stake, legal interest or duty in proceedings before the Court
- Where a dispute is predominantly within a court's jurisdiction, that court may interpret the Constitution for purposes of resolving it
- Out-of-jurisdiction matters pleaded as background need not be struck out if they serve as relevant background to the predominant dispute
Court orders
#- 1.Declared that the Court has jurisdiction to hear and determine the petition, the predominant dispute being about appointment of the Hospital's Board Members and the Chief Executive Officer and interpretation of related constitutional and statutory provisions
- 2.Ordered that matters on ownership and property in the Hospital and related property rights shall only constitute completeness of facts and background and shall not impair the Court's jurisdiction
- 3.Directed parties to take directions on further steps towards the expeditious hearing and determination of the petition
- 4.Ordered costs of the application in the cause
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Articles 20, 22, 23(3), 162(2)(a) and 165(5) of the Constitution of Kenya, 2010; Employment and Labour Relations Court Act, 2011
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Okiya Omtatah Okoiti v National Executive of The Republic & 8 others; University Academic Staff Union & another (Interested parties) [2019] KEELRC 918 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2019). Petition filed 09.04.2019 (amended 18.04.2019). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2019/918/eng@2019-07-31
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.