Kenya Export Floriculture, Horticulture and Allied Workers Union v Vegro (K) Limited [2020] KEELRC 1822 (KLR)

The Respondent argued there was no substantive or procedural law governing contempt since the Contempt of Court Act was declared unconstitutional. The court rejected this, holding that when the Act fell, the provisions that had repealed the Judicature Act also fell, restoring the Judicature Act as the basis for contempt. Society does not tolerate a vacuum in the law, and the application filed under the Judicature Act was properly before the court.

The Respondent argued the order was neither a positive nor negative order and thus incapable of execution. The court held that while there was no express order compelling any party to do anything, the order calling off the strike implied that workers would resume duty and the employer would allow them to continue uninterrupted. The subsequent lock-out of the workers was therefore against the court's order and amounted to contempt.

The court distinguished between the Respondent company and the individual officers cited. It was not clear that the alleged contemnors, apart from the Respondent, were responsible for the contempt: there was no indication they were served with the orders or acted personally to prevent compliance. The Respondent, which the court found guilty, was not itself cited for contempt, so the entire application failed.

The Respondent averred that the employees had been dismissed for participating in an illegal strike before the order was issued. The court rejected this because the Respondent, though present in court, never raised the position, and no dismissal letters were exhibited. The claimant's assertion that no employee had been dismissed prior to 4th July 2019 therefore stood unrebutted by evidence.