Kenya Plantation & Agricultural Workers Union v Solio Ranch Limited (Cause 7A of 2019) [2024] KEELRC 1622 (KLR)
The bottom line
#What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the claimant proved that the 62 named persons were employees of the respondent constituting a simple majority, entitling it to a recognition agreement under Section 54 of the Labour Relations Act
Yes. The burden shifted to the respondent, which failed to produce its employment records; the stamped union dues deductions list for December 2018 further corroborated the claim.
Sections 10 and 74 of the Employment Act obligate employers to keep employment records, so the respondent was best placed to disprove the claim. The respondent failed to avail such records while simultaneously alleging the 62 persons were not employees. The stamped December 2018 deductions list showed the respondent had treated them as unionisable employees and remitted dues, only stopping in January 2019 without explanation.
Whether the respondent's refusal to execute a recognition agreement amounts to unfair labour practice under Article 41 of the Constitution
Yes. The respondent deliberately, unreasonably and unlawfully refused to engage and execute the recognition agreement.
The claimant served the recognition agreement and reminders, and correspondences were sent to the respondent's own postal address (P.O BOX 2, Naro Moru) as reflected in its rubber stamp. The respondent's failure to respond or execute, despite engaging in settlement discussions after the cause was filed, constituted unfair labour practice under Article 41 and denied the employees the benefits of a CBA.
Whether the cause was premature for failure to exhaust Sections 62 and 74 of the Labour Relations Act
No. Section 74 of the Act allows a trade union to approach the court directly as the claimant did.
Counsel for the respondent argued violation of the doctrine of exhaustion, relying on authority that alternative dispute resolution mechanisms must be exhausted. The court held that Section 74 expressly permits a trade union to file such a cause in court under a certificate of urgency, which the claimant did, so there was no violation of the exhaustion doctrine.
Legal principles established
#- Once a claimant alleges that named persons are employees of an employer, the burden shifts to the employer, who is statutorily obliged to keep employment records, to dislodge that claim.
- A trade union filing a cause under Section 74 of the Labour Relations Act does not violate the doctrine of exhaustion.
Court orders
#- 1.A declaration be and is hereby issued that by failing, refusing, and or neglecting to execute a recognition agreement with the claimant, the respondent has engaged in unfair labour practices.
- 2.An order be and is hereby issued directing the respondent to engage and execute a recognition agreement with the claimant within 30 days of this judgment.
- 3.Costs of the cause to the claimant.
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Sections 54 and 74 of the Labour Relations Act; Article 41 of the Constitution
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Kenya Plantation & Agricultural Workers Union v Solio Ranch Limited (Cause 7A of 2019) [2024] KEELRC 1622 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2024). Memorandum of Claim dated 12th February, 2019 (not otherwise stated in the judgment). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2024/1622/eng@2024-06-26
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.