Dominic Murage & 9 others v Universities Academic Staff Union & 2 others [2021] KEELRC 2350 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Employment Court let excluded UASU members back into union elections by extending nominations instead of halting the whole process.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether the court should issue a temporary injunction
- 2.What relief should issue in this case
Key legal issues
#Whether the claimants established a prima facie case and irreparable injury warranting interim relief
Yes – locking the claimants out of the nomination process before their chapter elections violated their rights under Article 41 and the Labour Relations Act, and would disenfranchise them for five years.
The court found that the 2nd respondent chapter elections were scheduled for 16th June, 2021, after nominations for national offices closed on 31st May, 2021. As members cleared to contest chapter positions, the claimants would be unable to become delegates, voters or candidates at the National Delegates Conference. The court held this violated their constitutional and legal rights and stood to disenfranchise them for the next five years.
Balance of convenience
Balance of convenience favours the claimants; no particularised inconvenience to the union was shown to outweigh the disenfranchisement of the largest chapter.
The 1st respondent only urged that election materials had been prepared and ballot papers would go to waste, without particularising the inconvenience of extending nomination timelines. Against that, the 2nd respondent is the largest branch with over 1,500 members; locking out such a branch would disenfranchise its membership from constituting the new national office, defeating the purpose of unionisation under the LRA.
Whether the grant of conservatory relief enhances constitutional values and avoids rendering the suit nugatory
Yes – the relief enhances Article 41 constitutional values, and without it the substratum of the claim would be spent.
Applying the conservatory-order principles from Board of Management of Uhuru Secondary School, the court found the reliefs would enhance the constitutional values of Article 41 protecting trade union participation rights, and if not granted the claim and application would be rendered nugatory because the nomination and election processes would have concluded without the claimants.
Legal principles established
#- An applicant for an interlocutory injunction must sequentially establish a prima facie case, irreparable injury, and balance of convenience
- It would defeat the purpose of unionisation to lock out potential voters and candidates at any level of a trade union's elections
Court orders
#- 1.Aware of the Ruling delivered in Cause No. E188 of 2021 – Dominic Murage & 4 others v Richard M Bosire & 6 others [2021] eKLR and the directions that the 2nd respondent elections be held on 16th June, 2021
- 2.Notice dated 17th May, 2021 or any other notice or process including nominations or any other process relating to the elections of the national officials of the 1st respondent shall open for the next five (5) calendar days
- 3.Notices for national elections for the 1st respondent shall simultaneously issue to be held on the 14th day after this date/today
- 4.Costs awarded to the claimants
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Article 41 of the Constitution, 2010; section 34 of the Labour Relations Act; section 12 of the Employment and Labour Relations Court Act
Relief refused
#Temporary injunction restraining the entire elections process as sought in the notice dated 17th May, 2021
Instead of halting the process outright, the court granted a tailored remedy extending the nomination window and deferring the national elections, preserving the claimants' participation rights without derailing the elections entirely.
Costs
Costs awarded to the claimants.
Quotable passages
#Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.
Accordingly, the court finds merit in the application dated 19th May, 2021 and directs as follows
Notice dated 17th May, 2021 or any other notice or process including nominations or any other process relating to the elections of the national officials of the 1st respondent shall open for the next five (5) calendar days
Notices for national elections for the 1 st respondent shall simultaneously issue to be held on the 14 th day after this date/today
It would therefore defeat the very purpose of unionisation to lock out potential voters and candidates at any level of the 1 st respondent trade union.
The failure by the respondents to hold elections in good time cannot be attributed to the claimants.
Issues in the judgment
#Inconsistent dates for the 2nd respondent's chapter elections: the judgment variously refers to elections 'directed to be held on 16th May, 2021' and elsewhere states they are 'scheduled for 16th June, 2021'
Typographical errors in the judgment, e.g. '2nd respondent elations be held' and 'NATONAL ELECTIONS' in the quoted notice
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Dominic Murage & 9 others v Universities Academic Staff Union & 2 others [2021] KEELRC 2350 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2021). Cause (application dated 19th May, 2021) – referenced against Cause No. E188 of 2021. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2021/2350/eng@2021-06-21
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.