Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCAllowedNot stated in the judgment· [2024] KEELRC 2750 (KLR)

Yego v Nandi County Public Service Board & 3 others (Employment and Labour Relations Cause E071 of 2024) [2024] KEELRC 2750 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
17 November 2024
2,849 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~11 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Nandi county employee won temporary protection: the Employment Court stopped orders demoting him until it decides who actually employs him.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Claimant, by Notice of Motion dated 23rd August 2024 under section 3A & 3B of the Civil Procedure Act, Order 10 Rule 11 and Order 51 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules and Article 159 of the Constitution, sought stay of execution of directives issued on 1st August 2024 by the office of the County Secretary and the Clerk of the County Assembly, vacation of those directives, and a declaratory order retaining him as Senior Clerk Assistant with attendant benefits pending the main suit. He avers that his 2017 deployment from the County Executive to the County Assembly was a transfer of service, not secondment, during which he earned two promotions and related benefits, and that the directives reverting him to his 2019 position were a demotion amounting to technical oppression. The 1st and 3rd Respondents objected on jurisdiction and exhaustion grounds under Article 234(2)(i) of the Constitution, section 77 of the County Governments Act and related provisions, maintaining he was seconded and remains a County Executive employee. The 2nd and 4th Respondents averred the secondment's need had lapsed and he had been released. The court first found it had jurisdiction at the interim stage since the Claimant's employment status is disputed and a matter for trial. Applying Giella v Cassman Brown and Mrao Ltd, the court found a prima facie case, the secondment question being genuinely arguable, and granted the interim orders. The application was allowed with costs in the cause.

Key legal issues

#
01

Jurisdiction over the dispute

Holding

The court held it has jurisdiction to determine the application at the interim stage because the core question of the Claimant's employment status (County Executive vs County Assembly) is a matter for trial

Reasoning

Counsel for the 1st and 3rd Respondents objected that section 77 of the County Governments Act and related provisions required exhaustion of internal dispute resolution mechanisms. The court noted the parties disputed whether the Claimant is an employee of the County Government or the County Assembly, a matter requiring evidence at the main suit, and therefore held jurisdiction existed at the interim stage.

p. 5
02

Whether the Claimant met the conditions for injunctive relief

Holding

The Claimant established a prima facie case and, having satisfied the first two Giella principles, was entitled to the orders sought

Reasoning

The Claimant exhibited promotion and redesignation letters from the County Assembly, while the Respondents exhibited documents showing he was seconded. Whether he was on secondment was a matter warranting determination in the main suit, so a genuine and arguable case was established. Having found the first two principles satisfied, the court did not need to decide balance of convenience.

p. 6
03

Whether the Claimant was seconded or transferred to the County Assembly

Holding

Left open for determination in the main suit; disputed on the affidavits

Reasoning

The Claimant contended his 2017 deployment was a transfer of service, evidenced by promotions, redesignation and changed payment point, while the Respondents produced exhibits showing secondment at the request of the then Speaker. The court found this a contested factual issue reserved for trial.

p. 6

Legal principles established

#
  • Jurisdiction must be addressed immediately whenever raised; a court without jurisdiction must down tools
  • The three Giella v Cassman Brown conditions govern the grant of interlocutory injunctions
  • Definition of a prima facie case in civil applications

Court orders

#
  1. 1.A stay of execution and implementation of the directions issued by the office of the County Secretary and the clerk of the County Assembly vide the letters dated 1st August 2024 pending hearing and determination of the main suit
  2. 2.The directives issued on 1st August 2023 by the County Secretary be stayed pending hearing and determination of the case
  3. 3.The Claimant be retained in his current position as Senior Clerk Assistant with all attendant tasks and benefits as of law accorded to him pending hearing and determination of the suit
Jurisdiction invoked
Article 159 of the Constitution as read with section 3A & 3B of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 10 Rule 11, Order 51 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Yego v Nandi County Public Service Board & 3 others (Employment and Labour Relations Cause E071 of 2024) [2024] KEELRC 2750 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2024). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2024/2750/eng@2024-11-07

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