Association of Public Health Officers (Aphok) Nairobi Branch v Director General Nairobi Metropolitan Services & 5 others; Josephine Kibaru Mbae & 4 others (Interested parties) [2022] KEELRC 713 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Employment Court dismissed a health officers' union challenge to staff deployments because the association proved no authority to sue and pleaded no specific rights violations.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Jurisdiction of the ELRC over deployment and appointment of seconded health staff
Court has jurisdiction; appointment and deployment of staff fall within Section 12 ELRC Act
The Court held that issues of appointment and deployment of staff are within the jurisdiction conferred by Section 12 of the Employment and Labour Relations Court Act, 2014 and Article 162(1) of the Constitution, and had no difficulty finding jurisdiction despite the devolution-related context of the Nairobi Metropolitan Services.
Locus standi of the petitioner association
Petitioner lacked locus standi; no authority from affected members filed and authority specifically challenged and unanswered
Following its own decision in Association of Public Health Officers of Kenya v Narok County Chief Officer, the Court found that no letter of authority from the alleged affected members was filed. The further replying affidavit alleged the member list was fraudulently extracted from a 2017 document, allegations which went unanswered, so the petitioner failed to establish authority to litigate on behalf of the deployed employees.
Precision of constitutional pleadings
Petition failed the Anarita Karimi/Mumo Matemu threshold
The Court found the petition did not disclose with specificity how the rights of the deployed employees were threatened or violated, lacking any specific pleadings regarding individual employees or how the impugned deployment letter violated their rights.
Exhaustion of internal dispute resolution mechanisms
Public service grievance mechanisms should be exhausted before approaching the Court
Relying on Court of Appeal and ELRC precedent, the Court noted that the County Governments Act and Public Service Act provide appeal mechanisms for such disputes, which ought to have been used first before invoking the constitutional route.
Appointments of 3rd and 4th interested parties
Complaint dismissed; positions only occupied in acting capacity pending advertisement
The respondents' unchallenged evidence was that no substantive appointments had been made and the officers held the positions in acting capacity. The petitioners adduced no evidence that the officers were unqualified or that rights were violated.
Legal principles established
#- An association must demonstrate authority/consent from the employees it purports to represent to have locus standi
- A petition alleging constitutional violation must plead with precision the provisions violated and the manner of violation
- Where a clear procedure for redress of a grievance is prescribed by statute, it should be strictly followed before resorting to court
Court orders
#- 1.The petition is dismissed in its entirety
- 2.No order as to costs
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Section 12 of the Employment and Labour Relations Court Act, 2014 and Article 162(1) of the Constitution
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Association of Public Health Officers (Aphok) Nairobi Branch v Director General Nairobi Metropolitan Services & 5 others; Josephine Kibaru Mbae & 4 others (Interested parties) [2022] KEELRC 713 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2022). Petition filed 5th February 2021 (E&LR Petition, Nairobi). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2022/713/eng@2022-02-17
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.