Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCPartially AllowedNot stated in judgment (filed 25th May 2021; related to Misc. Application 1 of 2021)· [2024] KEELRC 2063 (KLR)

Kenya National Union of Nurses v Kirinyaga County Public Service Board; Public Service Commission (Interested Party) (Miscellaneous Application 1 of 2021) [2024] KEELRC 2063 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
26 July 2024
2,001 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~8 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan court ordered Nyeri County to reinstate 188 dismissed nurses but denied the nurses' union legal costs because it disobeyed court orders during the strike.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This ruling by Makau J of the ELRC at Nyeri determines a Notice of Motion dated 24th May 2021 by the applicant union seeking adoption and enforcement of a Public Service Commission decision of 3rd March 2021, which found the dismissal of 188 nurses by the County Government of Nyeri irregular, unfair and unlawful and ordered their reinstatement without loss of benefits. The nurses had been dismissed after participating in a strike declared unlawful and unprotected by the court in July 2019. The County Government sought review before the PSC; the PSC on 13th October 2021 acknowledged an error apparent on the record (failure to consider evidence that the nurses defied show cause letters) but declined to reverse its decision. That review decision was subsequently quashed on judicial review for illegality and irrationality, leaving the initial 3rd March 2021 decision intact. The respondent opposed adoption, arguing the initial decision was tainted by the same error of law, that reinstatement was no longer practicable given filled vacancies, no budgetary allocation, and the lapse of three years since separation, citing Sotik Highlands Tea Estates v Kenya Plantation and Agriculture Workers Union. The court held that the appeal mechanism under section 77 of the County Government Act and the PSC Act had been exhausted, that the only quashed decision was the review decision of 13th October 2021, and that no authority was cited granting the court discretion to reject a PSC decision outside judicial review. The court adopted the PSC decision of 3rd March 2021 for enforcement under section 89(1) of the PSC Act but declined to award the applicant costs because it had obtained the decision while in contempt of court orders. The application was allowed on its principal prayers.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the PSC decision of 3rd March 2021 should be adopted and enforced as a decree of the ELRC

Holding

The court adopted and enforced the PSC decision of 3rd March 2021 reinstating the 188 nurses, as it remained intact and unchallenged after the judicial review proceedings.

Reasoning

The judicial review proceedings only quashed the PSC review decision of 13th October 2021; the initial decision of 3rd March 2021 was left intact. The appeal mechanism under section 77 of the County Government Act and the PSC Act had been exhausted. The respondent did not cite any law or authority granting the court discretion to reject a PSC decision outside the judicial review process, so the court adopted the decision under section 89(1) of the PSC Act.

p. 5
02

Whether the court has discretion to decline enforcement of a PSC decision tainted with error of law

Holding

While the court acknowledged the decision was infected with an uncorrected error and that practicability of reinstatement was not evaluated, no authority was cited granting the court discretion to reject a PSC decision outside judicial review.

Reasoning

The court accepted that the PSC acknowledged an error apparent on the record but declined to reverse its decision, and that the PSC failed to evaluate the practicability of reinstatement. However, because the respondent cited no law or authority granting the court discretion to reject a PSC decision outside judicial review, the court nonetheless adopted the decision for enforcement.

p. 4

Legal principles established

#
  • Where the internal appeal and review mechanisms under the County Government Act and the PSC Act have been exhausted, the ELRC may enforce the resulting PSC decision under section 89(1) of the PSC Act.
  • A PSC decision that has not been quashed on judicial review remains intact and enforceable, even if a later review decision relating to it was quashed.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The decision of the PSC delivered on 3rd March 2021 is adopted for enforcement as provided under section 89(1) of the PSC Act
  2. 2.No costs of the application awarded to the applicant because it obtained the decision while in contempt of court orders

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Employment and Labour Relations Court Actsection 13
  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 46 rule 19(2)
  • Public Service Commission Actsection 89(1)
  • Public Service Commission Actsection 89(2)
  • Public Service Commission Actsection 88(1)
  • Public Service Commission Actsection 77 (cited via County Government Act reference)
  • County Government Actsection 77
  • Constitution of KenyaArticle 162(2)(a)
  • ELRC (Procedure) RulesRule 28(3)

Cases cited (1)

  • Sotik Highlands Tea Estates v Kenya Plantation and Agriculture Workers Union
    [2017] eKLR
Jurisdiction invoked
Section 89(1) of the Public Service Commission Act and Article 162(2)(a) of the Constitution

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Kenya National Union of Nurses v Kirinyaga County Public Service Board; Public Service Commission (Interested Party) (Miscellaneous Application 1 of 2021) [2024] KEELRC 2063 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2024). Not stated in judgment (filed 25th May 2021; related to Misc. Application 1 of 2021). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2024/2063/eng@2024-07-26

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