Shalimar Flowers Limited v Kenya Plantation and Agricultural Workers Union (Employment and Labour Relations Cause E001 of 2024) [2024] KEELRC 1746 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan employment court declined to block a flower farm union's strike notice and ordered the employer to honour transport and housing commitments in their collective bargaining agreement.
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 Nyandarua Labour Officer/conciliator (S.N. Kingori) was properly appointed and had jurisdiction over the dispute
- 2.Whether the Claimant was afforded a fair hearing during conciliation
- 3.Whether the recommendations by the Nyandarua conciliator were legal and valid
- 4.Whether Shalimar Flowers (Mahee farm) is within the Ol Kalou Municipality boundaries
- 5.Whether the strike notice dated 19th December 2023 was legal and valid
- 6.Who bears the costs of the suit
Key legal issues
#Validity of the second conciliator's appointment
The appointment of S.N. Kingori as second conciliator was regular since the dispute before the first conciliator (Kirera) was never resolved and the matter remained unresolved for over two years
The court traced the chronology of conciliation meetings before Kirera from 2020 to March 2022 without resolution. Section 67 of the Labour Relations Act requires a dispute to be resolved within thirty days or an agreed extended period. Because the matter was unresolved for over two years, Kirera's appointment lapsed, permitting a fresh appointment. The Claimant's failure to attend Kingori's meetings forfeited its chance to query her appointment.
Validity of the strike notice
The strike notice was issued after the trade dispute remained unresolved through conciliation, and the court did not declare it illegal
The dispute was reported to the Minister of Labour as required by law; two conciliators attempted resolution without success and recommendations went unimplemented. The Claimant declined to attend the second conciliator's meetings. Out-of-court settlement attempts ordered by the court from January to June 2024 also bore no fruit, so the court treated the conciliation route as exhausted.
Transport and housing allowance entitlements
The transport and house allowance issues must be resolved as per the parties' CBA, and the Claimant reneged on the agreed transportation provision
Clause 36 of the agreement produced in court provided that the company shall provide a bus to ferry workers to and from work. The court read this as an agreed transportation obligation which the Claimant reneged on, requiring adequate logistical safeguards for all workers. The CBA was not fully exhibited, so the court directed the parties to resolve the issues per the CBA and report back within two weeks.
Legal principles established
#- A trade dispute is deemed unresolved after conciliation where the conciliator issues a certificate to that effect or the thirty-day period from appointment of the conciliator expires
- Where a first conciliation remains unresolved for over two years, the conciliator's appointment lapses and a fresh conciliator may properly be appointed
Court orders
#- 1.The issue on transport and house allowance should be resolved as per the CBA of the parties
- 2.The Claimant to provide adequate logistical safeguards catering for all workers on transportation
- 3.The parties to resolve the house allowance issue and report back to court their resolutions within 2 weeks
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Original jurisdiction of the Employment and Labour Relations Court over trade disputes (Labour Relations Act); no specific constitutional/statutory basis for the court's jurisdiction is cited in the judgment
Relief refused
#Judicial review order to quash the recommendations dated 23rd November 2023 by S.N. Kingori
The court held the second conciliator's appointment was regular because the first conciliation remained unresolved for over two years
Declaration that the strike notice dated 19th December 2023 was illegal and unprocedural and an order striking it out
The court found the dispute was reported to the Minister of Labour as per the law and remained unresolved, so the strike notice followed failure to resolve the dispute through conciliation
Costs
No costs order made in the judgment
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.
In view of the fact that this issue remains largely unresolved, I will direct the parties to resolve the same and report back to court their resolutions of the same within 2 weeks.
Having considered the issue before the parties, the issue on transport and house allowance should be resolved as per the CBA of the parties.
My reading of the clause shows that transportation of the parties was agreed upon and the Claimant renege on it. They must provide adequate Logistical safeguards which will cater for all workers.
after the matter was not received after over 2 years, his appointment lapsed and another conciliator was appointed.
The Respondent issued a strike notice after failure to resolve the dispute through conciliation.
Issues in the judgment
#The judgment does not state the case number, full names of the parties, or the name of the Respondent union; the claimant is only identified indirectly as 'Shalimar Flowers' / 'Shalimar Mahee flowers'
The court refers to the first conciliator inconsistently, at one point as 'Mwera' though elsewhere he is 'M. N. Kirera'
The date of the first conciliator's joint meeting is given inconsistently as 25th July 2021 in one passage and the parties are recorded as meeting on 14th October 2021; also the witness is marked 'RW-1' though he was the claimant's witness
The judgment makes no express order on costs despite both parties seeking costs
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Shalimar Flowers Limited v Kenya Plantation and Agricultural Workers Union (Employment and Labour Relations Cause E001 of 2024) [2024] KEELRC 1746 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2024). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2024/1746/eng@2024-07-09
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.