Hesbon Machano Makhoha v Tarmal Wire Products Ltd [2022] KEELRC 345 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Employment and Labour Relations Court struck out a work injury claim, confirming WIBA routes workplace injury compensation through the government, not courts.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Jurisdiction of the ELRC over a work injury claim under WIBA
The suit, filed after the enactment of WIBA, was filed in a court without jurisdiction by dint of Section 16 of the Act and is a nullity
Section 16 of WIBA ousts court actions for damages for occupational accidents, vesting compensation exclusively under the Act. The Claimant's reliance on the High Court decision in Petition No. 185 of 2008 (later overturned on appeal) and on legitimate expectation cannot sustain jurisdiction, since judge-made law cannot supersede statute. The suit was therefore a nullity at inception and had to be struck down.
Dismissal for want of prosecution under Rule 16
Rule 16 presupposes the existence of a valid suit; since this suit was a nullity, it could not stand and was struck down
The suit lay dormant from 15th July 2020. On the notice to show cause, the Claimant explained the inaction by reliance on conflicting interpretations of the Supreme Court's decision in Law Society of Kenya v Attorney General. The Court held the failure to prosecute stemmed from the suit having been filed in a court without jurisdiction, and Rule 16 envisages a valid suit.
Legal principles established
#- A suit filed in a court without jurisdiction is a nullity and the court must down tools
- A court's jurisdiction flows only from the Constitution or legislation and cannot be self-conferred
- Case law cannot supersede or replace statute
- Section 16 of WIBA bars an employee's court action for damages for occupational accidents, confining compensation to the Act's provisions
Court orders
#- 1.The Claimant's suit is struck down with no orders as to costs
- 2.The Claimant may, if he so wishes, forthwith lodge his claim with the Director of Occupational Safety and Health Services in accordance with the provisions of the Work Injury Benefits Act (WIBA)
- 3.The Court file is ordered closed
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction under the Employment and Labour Relations Act; issue of jurisdiction under Section 16 of the Work Injury Benefits Act 2007
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Hesbon Machano Makhoha v Tarmal Wire Products Ltd [2022] KEELRC 345 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2022). Cause No 668 of 2017. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2022/345/eng@2022-03-24
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.