Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCOther· [2023] KEELRC 840 (KLR)

Muchoki v Muraya (Employment and Labour Relations Appeal E013 of 2022) [2023] KEELRC 840 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court of Kenya
13 April 2023
OMOnesmus N Makau
4,078 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~16 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Employment Court confirmed workplace injury compensation claims must first go to the Director of Occupational Health, not a magistrate's court.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The appellant appealed to the Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nyeri against a decision of Hon EM Nyaga SPM dismissing his claim for special and general damages for injuries to his left 3rd and 4th fingers, suffered on March 25, 2014 when a chaff cutter he was operating switched on while he dislodged stuck fodder. The appellant alleged breach of the employer's statutory duty to provide safe working conditions; the respondent denied liability, asserting the appellant was a milk-delivery and domestic worker injured while on a frolic of his own outside his duties. The trial court had applied volenti non fit injuria and dismissed the suit for failure of proof. On appeal, the appellant attacked the trial court's reliance on the Director of Occupational Health and Safety Services' investigation report as hearsay and the invocation of volenti non fit injuria. The court, however, raised the question of jurisdiction of its own motion. Relying on sections 16, 51 and 52(2) of the Work Injury Benefits Act and the binding decisions of the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court, it held that adjudication of workplace injury compensation claims vests exclusively in the Director, that the trial court lacked original jurisdiction, and that its judgment was a nullity since parties cannot confer jurisdiction by consent. It further held that the ELRC's appellate jurisdiction in WIBA matters lies only under section 52(2) against a decision of the Director, which was absent here. The court declined to consider the merits and struck out the appeal with no costs.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the trial court had jurisdiction to entertain a WIBA compensation claim

Holding

The trial court lacked original jurisdiction because WIBA vests adjudication of workplace injury compensation claims in the Director of Occupational Health and Safety Services.

Reasoning

The court held that sections 16 and 51 WIBA, read with binding Court of Appeal and Supreme Court decisions, bar court proceedings for workplace injury compensation; such disputes must first go to the Director. The preliminary objection raised at trial was ignored, but jurisdiction can be raised at any stage, even on appeal, and consent of parties cannot cure its absence. The trial judgment was therefore a nullity.

p. 7
02

Whether the appeal before the ELRC was competent

Holding

The appeal was incompetent because appellate jurisdiction in WIBA matters lies only under section 52(2) WIBA against a decision of the Director.

Reasoning

Since no decision of the Director had been impugned, the ELRC's appellate jurisdiction under section 52(2) WIBA was not properly invoked. The court therefore struck out the appeal without considering the merits, applying the principle that a court without jurisdiction must down its tools.

p. 8
03

Whether the doctrine of stare decisis barred reliance on decisions conferring jurisdiction on trial courts

Holding

The court was bound by the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court decisions excluding court jurisdiction over WIBA matters, despite persuasive contrary first-instance authority.

Reasoning

The court acknowledged the decision in West Kenya Sugar Co Ltd v Tito Lucheli Tangale, where legitimate expectation preserved jurisdiction for suits filed before the appellate ruling, but held itself bound by the superior courts' determinations under the doctrine of stare decisis.

p. 7

Legal principles established

#
  • The Director of Occupational Health and Safety Services has exclusive original jurisdiction over WIBA compensation claims, and courts have no original jurisdiction over such matters.
  • Parties cannot confer jurisdiction on a court by consent, and a court without jurisdiction must down its tools.
  • Appeals in WIBA matters lie only to the Industrial Court against a decision of the Director under section 52(2) WIBA.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The appeal is struck out with no costs.

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Work Injury Benefits Actsection 51
  • Work Injury Benefits Actsection 16
  • Work Injury Benefits Actsection 23(1)
  • Work Injury Benefits Actsection 52(2)
  • Work Injury Benefits Actsection 53
  • Evidence Actsection 63(2)(d)
  • Evidence Actsection 68(1)(2)
  • Evidence Actsection 79
  • Evidence Actsection 107
  • ELRC Procedure RulesRule 28(3)

Cases cited (9)

  • Tile and Carpet Centre Limited v Geoffrey Kipkorir Langat
    [2021] eKLR
  • Bwire v Wayo & Sailoki
    [2022] KECH 7 KLR
  • Maridadi Flowers Ltd v Director of Occupational Safety and Health Services
    [2021] KEELRC 2 (KLR)
  • Selle & another v Associated Motor Boat Co Ltd & others
  • Bundi Murube v Joseph Onkuba Nyamaro
    [1982-88] 1 KLR 108
  • Hon Attorney General v Law Society of Kenya & another
    [2017] eKLR
  • West Kenya Sugar Co Ltd v Tito Lucheli Tangale
    [2021] eKLR
  • Kenya Ports Authority v Modern Holding (EA) Ltd
    [2017] eKLR
  • Owners of the Lillian "S" v Caltex Oil (Kenya) Ltd
    [1989] eKLR
On appeal from
Senior Principal Magistrate's Court (before Hon EM Nyaga SPM)
not stated in judgment
Jurisdiction invoked
Sections 16, 51 and 52(2) of the Work Injury Benefits Act; appellate jurisdiction of the ELRC under section 52(2) WIBA

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Muchoki v Muraya (Employment and Labour Relations Appeal E013 of 2022) [2023] KEELRC 840 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2023). . Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2023/840/eng@2023-04-13

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