Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCAllowedPetition No 4 of 2018· [2020] KEELRC 1922 (KLR)

Francis Chamwor P.S. O Muken & 2 others v Speaker Trans-Nzoia County Assembly & 3 others [2020] KEELRC 1922 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court of Kenya at Eldoret
30 October 2020
2,663 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~11 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan court cancelled county assembly staff promotions to permanent terms because the employer skipped open competition and excluded six workers without evidence.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The three petitioners challenged the decision of the Trans-Nzoia County Assembly Service Board of 27th June 2016 converting the 5th to 48th Respondents from two-year renewable contracts to permanent and pensionable terms with effect from 1st July 2016, to the exclusion of six named contract employees. They sought declarations of discrimination, unfair labour practice, nepotism, abuse of office and corruption inconsistent with Articles 10, 41(1), 73 and 75(1) of the Constitution and the Employment Act, 2007, and certiorari to quash the Board's decision. The respondents, through the affidavit of Elkana Kipkurgat Korir, maintained that due process was followed: vacancies were advertised in June 2015, 108 of 1386 applicants shortlisted, interviews conducted and recruitment based on merit. The respondents also contended, citing Anarita Karimi Njeri v Republic and Meme vs Republic, that the petition failed to plead constitutional violations with precision, that non-renewal of fixed-term contracts on performance grounds violated no rights, and that the petition was brought for the six employees rather than in public interest. The court found that although the original recruitment was competitive, the 2016 transition to permanent and pensionable terms occurred without any open and competitive selection process and without any evidence of appraisals, show-cause letters or warnings justifying the exclusion of the six employees. The court declared the appointments discriminatory and an unfair labour practice and issued certiorari quashing the Board's decision of 27th June 2016. No costs order was recorded.

Key legal issues

#
01

Unfair labour practice in conversion of contracts to permanent terms

Holding

The internal transition from fixed-term contracts to permanent and pensionable terms without an open and competitive process amounted to unfair labour practice.

Reasoning

The initial appointments in October 2015 followed an advertised, shortlisted and interviewed process, but the 2016 conversion to permanent and pensionable terms was done without any advertisement or competitive selection. The respondents produced no evidence of any transitional or promotional interviews. The court held this undermined the constitutional values of competence, merit and fair labour practices.

p. 4
02

Discrimination against the six contract employees

Holding

Excluding the six employees from permanent terms on unproved allegations of non-performance was discriminatory.

Reasoning

The respondents asserted the six contracts were not renewed on grounds of non-performance but exhibited no appraisal, show-cause letter or warning to substantiate this. In contrast, other employees were converted to permanent terms without a competitive process. The differential treatment, unsupported by evidence, was discriminatory contrary to fair labour practice principles.

p. 4
03

Good faith and motive behind the petition

Holding

The court noted the petition was filed nearly a year after the appointments and appeared prompted by non-renewal of the six contracts, but the complaints were still justified.

Reasoning

The court observed that no complaint of nepotism or corruption was raised at the time of the initial appointments and that the petition was filed on 4th August 2016, almost a year later, after the six contracts were not renewed. It nevertheless found merit in the complaints about the non-competitive transition and the unproved non-performance allegations.

p. 4

Legal principles established

#
  • The transition of employees from fixed-term contracts to permanent and pensionable terms must be done through an open and competitive selection process; failure to do so amounts to unfair labour practice.
  • Exclusion of employees from conversion to permanent terms on unproved allegations of non-performance is discriminatory.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.A declaration that the appointment of the 5th to 48th Respondents on 1st July 2016 as employees of the 2nd Respondent on permanent and pensionable terms to the exclusion of the six employees was discriminatory and amounted to unfair labour practice
  2. 2.An order of certiorari quashing the proceedings and decision of the 4th Respondent's Service Board of 27th June 2016 to employ the 5th to 49th Respondents on permanent and pensionable terms

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Constitution of Kenya, 2010Article 10(1) and 10(2)(b) and (c)
  • Constitution of Kenya, 2010Article 41(1)
  • Constitution of Kenya, 2010Article 73
  • Constitution of Kenya, 2010Article 75(1)
  • Constitution of Kenya, 2010Article 232
  • Constitution of Kenya, 2010Chapter Six
  • Employment Act

Cases cited (4)

  • Ferdinard Ndung’u Waititu v Benson Ritho and 2 Others
    (2018) eKLR
  • Robert Mureithi Ndegwa v Minister for Tourism
    Act 41 of 2012
  • Anarita Karimi Njeri v Republic
  • Meme vs Republic
    (2004) eKLR
Jurisdiction invoked
Constitution of Kenya, 2010 (alleged violations of Articles 10, 41(1), 73 and 75(1)); Employment Act, 2007

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Later judgments citing this (1)

#

Judgments in the corpus that rely on this one. Where the Court said how it treated the authority, that is shown.

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Francis Chamwor P.S. O Muken & 2 others v Speaker Trans-Nzoia County Assembly & 3 others [2020] KEELRC 1922 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2020). Petition No 4 of 2018. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2020/1922/eng@2020-10-30

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.