Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCDismissedPetition No. E006 of 2021· [2021] KEELRC 172 (KLR)

Ignatious Nykuri Fwamba & 2 others v Bungoma County Assembly Service Board & 6 others [2021] KEELRC 172 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
15 December 2021
3,078 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~12 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

The Employment Court declined to stop Bungoma County Assembly's recruitment of 55 staff because the budget was properly approved and the petitioners showed no harm.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The three Petitioners, by petition dated 12th October 2021, challenged the advertisement, shortlisting, interviews, recruitment and employment of 55 persons by the Bungoma County Assembly Service Board pursuant to an advertisement of 2nd September 2021, contending the recruitment was undertaken without adequate budgetary allocation in violation of the Constitution (Article 207(1)), sections 107(1) and 108 of the Public Finance Management Act 2012 and regulation 42 of the PFM (County Government) Regulations 2015. They sought a permanent injunction and, by notice of motion, conservatory orders halting the recruitment pending hearing of the petition. The Respondents, through the replying affidavit of the Board's Secretary and Assembly Clerk, John K. O. Mosongo, opposed, asserting the recruitment was budgeted for and approved by the County Assembly, that secondment arrangements had plugged staffing gaps since 2014, and that the petition was brought with ulterior motives by disgruntled persons, citing concerns over the petition preamble naming a non-petitioner - a defect cured by amendment. Applying the Munya criteria for conservatory orders, the court found no prima facie case: the budget for FY 2021/2022, including recruitment of new staff, was approved by the County Assembly on 19th August 2021, and the court would not interfere with that legislative and oversight mandate. Public interest favoured the recruitment proceeding since expenses had been incurred, and the Petitioners demonstrated no prejudice, not even having applied for the positions. Guided by the Supreme Court's Wambora decision on judicial restraint and separation of powers, the court dismissed the application with costs in the cause on 15th December 2021.

Key legal issues

#
01

Prima facie case for conservatory orders

Holding

No prima facie case established because the budget for recruiting new staff in FY 2021/2022 was approved by the Bungoma County Assembly on 19th August 2021

Reasoning

The court examined the budget and Hansard extract showing the Assembly approved money for promotion and employment of new staff. The Assembly, with legislative and oversight functions, approved the budget, and the court declined to interfere with that constitutional mandate. The complaint that the number of recruits was undisclosed was dismissed as academic.

p. 3
02

Public interest

Holding

Public interest favours continuation of the recruitment exercise, which had already incurred expenses

Reasoning

Stopping the entire recruitment over one contested position (Deputy Clerk qualifications) would be unreasonable. Public funds had been spent on advertisement, shortlisting and other recruitment steps, and the seconded staff covering the gaps were being recalled.

p. 4
03

Prejudice to the Petitioners

Holding

Petitioners demonstrated no prejudice; they did not even apply for the advertised positions

Reasoning

The guiding principle is prejudice to the petitioners if orders are not granted. The Petitioners were not applicants in the recruitment process and were not shown to have been locked out, so no irredeemable prejudice was demonstrated.

p. 4

Legal principles established

#
  • Conservatory orders in public law litigation are granted on inherent merit, bearing in mind public interest, constitutional values and proportionate magnitudes
  • Courts should exercise judicial restraint and not issue conservatory orders that hinder other arms of government in performing their constitutional and statutory roles, reviewing only the final outcome

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The application for conservatory orders is dismissed
  2. 2.Costs of the application in the cause

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Constitution of KenyaArticle 207(1)
  • Public Finance Management ActSections 107(1) and 108
  • Public Finance Management (County Government) Regulations 2015Regulation 42
  • County Governments ActSection 12
  • County Assembly Service Act
  • County Assembly Act

Cases cited (7)

  • Brian Agin & 2 others -vs- Wafula Chebukati & 9 others
    (2017) eKLR
  • Gatirau Peter Munya -vs- Dickson Mwenda Kithunji & 2 Others
    (2014) eKLR
  • Kenyan Association of Manufacturers & 2 others - vs- Cabinet Secretary Ministry of Environment & Natural Resources & 3 others
    (2017) eKLR
  • Mount Kenya Breweries Limited - vs- Kenya Revenue Authority
    unreported
  • Mrau Ltd -vs First American Bank of Kenya
    (2013) eKLR
  • Julius Kariuki Mate & Another & Martin Nyaga Wambora & Another
    2019 (eKLR)
  • Evans Mswahali Ladtema -vs County Assembly of Vihiga & others
    Constitutional Petition No. 31 of 2021
Jurisdiction invoked
Article 207(1) of the Constitution; Public Finance Management Act 2012 (sections 107(1) and 108); Public Finance Management (County Government) Regulations 2015, regulation 42

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Ignatious Nykuri Fwamba & 2 others v Bungoma County Assembly Service Board & 6 others [2021] KEELRC 172 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2021). Petition No. E006 of 2021. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2021/172/eng@2021-12-15

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