Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCOtherMemorandum of Claim filed 3rd August 2016 (ELRC, Nairobi)· [2021] KEELRC 726 (KLR)

Transport Workers Union Kenya v Automobile Association of Kenya; Kenya Long Distance Truck Drivers & Allied Workers Union (Interested Party) [2021] KEELRC 726 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
28 September 2021
3,370 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~13 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan court ordered a headcount of employees to decide which union truly represents them, instead of ruling on the paperwork battle.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Claimant Union sued the Automobile Association of Kenya in August 2016 seeking orders compelling the Respondent to forward a concluded 2016/17 CBA for registration under Section 60 of the Labour Relations Act, restraining termination of the parties' Recognition Agreement, and directing remittance of trade union dues for April, June and July 2016 and thereafter under Sections 48 and 50, plus restraint of discrimination against unionised employees under Section 5. The Respondent filed no response. The Interested Party Union, which signed a Recognition Agreement with the Respondent in July 2016 and a subsequent CBA, responded that the Respondent's employees wilfully resigned from the Claimant in April 2016, joined it in June 2016, and that dues have been remitted to it since. The Claimant countered that the resignation notices were generic, undated and not addressed to the employer as required by Section 48(6), relied on authorities on recognition thresholds and union suitability, and pointed to interim orders of 19th December 2016 requiring dues to be held in a separate account. The Interested Party argued the employees' freedom of association under Article 41 and Section 4(1) of the Act, that technicalities should not defeat substance, and that the Claimant lacked locus standi for want of members. The Court did not pronounce final judgment on the competing claims. Treating the matter as a demarcation dispute, it directed the Respondent and the Interested Party to meet the expenses of a Ministry of Labour census of the Respondent's union members, with the report to be filed within 60 days, and ordered that the costs of the suit abide the outcome of the census.

Key legal issues

#
01

Validity of resignations from the Claimant Union

Holding

Contested; the Claimant argues the resignation notices were generic, undated and not addressed to the employer as required by Section 48(6), while the Interested Party submits substance prevails over form; the Court did not finally decide, directing a census instead.

Reasoning

The Claimant relied on authority that resignation letters must be addressed to the employer under Section 48(6), pointing out the annexed notices were undated, generic and unacknowledged. The Interested Party countered that these were minor technicalities and that no member recanted. The Court found the matter to be a demarcation dispute best resolved by a Ministry of Labour census of union members rather than by final judgment on the papers.

p. 3
02

Registration of the concluded 2016/17 CBA

Holding

Not granted; the Interested Party submitted the prayer was overtaken by events and that Section 60 places the obligation to submit the CBA on the employer.

Reasoning

The Claimant sought an order compelling the Respondent to forward the signed CBA for registration under Sections 59 and 60. The Interested Party argued the relief was overtaken by events since employees were already enjoying benefits of a later CBA, and that the Claimant itself could have submitted the CBA. The Court made no final determination on this head, deferring the matter via the census directions.

p. 3
03

Recognition Agreement between the Respondent and the Interested Party

Holding

Challenged as null and void for want of capacity, but not finally determined; the Court deferred to the census of members.

Reasoning

The Claimant submitted the Respondent never applied to the Labour Board under Section 54(5) to terminate the recognition agreement, hence no capacity to sign with the Interested Party. The Interested Party asserted employees freely resigned and attained a simple majority before signing. The Court treated the dispute as a demarcation dispute requiring an independent census before final orders.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • Section 48(6) of the Labour Relations Act requires resignation letters from a trade union to be addressed to the employer.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The Respondent and the Interested Party shall meet the expenses of the Ministry of Labour Officials who will preside over a census of the Union members at the Respondent
  2. 2.The census report to be filed in Court within the next 60 days
  3. 3.The report to be filed by the Ministry of Labour within 3 days of completion of the exercise
  4. 4.Parties to take a mention date within 4 days of the filing of the report
  5. 5.The costs of the suit shall abide the outcome of the census

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Labour Relations Act, 2007Section 60
  • Labour Relations Act, 2007Sections 48 & 50
  • Labour Relations Act, 2007Section 5
  • Labour Relations Act, 2007Section 54
  • Labour Relations Act, 2007Section 54(5)
  • Labour Relations Act, 2007Section 54(6)
  • Labour Relations Act, 2007Section 54(7)
  • Labour Relations Act, 2007Section 48(2)
  • Labour Relations Act, 2007Section 48(6)
  • Labour Relations Act, 2007Section 48(8)
  • Labour Relations Act, 2007Section 49(3)
  • Labour Relations Act, 2007Section 4(1)
  • Labour Relations Act, 2007Section 59
  • Constitution of Kenya, 2010Article 41

Cases cited (4)

  • Transport Workers Union v Saudi Arabia Airlines
    [2016] eKLR
  • Kenya Hotels & Allied Workers Union v Hotel Waterbuck Limited & KUDHEIHA Workers (Interested Party)
    [2021] eKLR
  • Kenya Scientific Research International Technical & Institutions Workers Union v Kenya Marine and Fisheries Research Institute
    [2014] eKLR
  • Kenya Tertiary and Schools Workers Union (KETASWU) v University Council University of Nairobi; KUDHEIHA Workers (Interested Party)
    [2021] eKLR
Jurisdiction invoked
Sections 54(6) and 54(7) of the Labour Relations Act, 2007 – referral of an unresolved recognition dispute to this Court

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Transport Workers Union Kenya v Automobile Association of Kenya; Kenya Long Distance Truck Drivers & Allied Workers Union (Interested Party) [2021] KEELRC 726 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2021). Memorandum of Claim filed 3rd August 2016 (ELRC, Nairobi). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2021/726/eng@2021-09-28

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