Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCStruck OutPetition dated 13th March 2023

Thuo & 4 others v Kenya Union of Commercial Food and Allied Workers; National Hospital Insurance Fund & another (Interested Parties) (Employment and Labour Relations Cause E049 of 2023) [2025] KEELRC 279 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
6 February 2025
4,144 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~17 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Employment Court struck out a petition against a union dues increase, ruling aggrieved members must appeal within 30 days under the Labour Relations Act, not file petitions.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
Five employees of the National Hospital Insurance Fund, members of the Central Stafi Committee of the Kenya Union of Commercial Food and Allied Workers, petitioned against the union's unilateral increase of union dues to 2% of gross salary (minimum Kshs. 200) through Gazette Notice No. 7, contrary to Article 5 of the Union Constitution which capped dues at Kshs. 400. They sought a declaration that the Gazette Notice was unlawful, certiorari to quash it, and mandamus compelling the union and the Cabinet Secretary for Labour to revoke it and reimburse deductions, alleging violations of Articles 40, 41 and 47 and of the Fair Administrative Action Act. The Respondent defended the increase as lawfully passed at a National Delegates Conference on 20th February 2021, submitted to the Registrar under section 27 of the Labour Relations Act, gazetted on 23rd April 2021 with a 21-day objection window, and implemented under section 48. The Interested Parties argued the suit was time-barred under section 30. The court found the union followed the law in amending its constitution, that under Article 41(4) the court cannot interfere with the union's administration or vary its dues, and that members who feel oppressed may simply leave the union. It further held that the petitioners, aggrieved by a decision of the Registrar, should have appealed within thirty days under section 30 rather than filing a petition, which was irregular. The petition was struck out with no orders as to costs.

Questions the Court framed

#

The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.

  1. 1.Whether the Respondent lawfully amended its constitution and increased union dues through Gazette Notice No. 7 of 2021
  2. 2.Whether the Petitioners' constitutional rights under Articles 40, 41 and 47 were violated by the unilateral increase of union dues without consultation
  3. 3.Whether the Petition is time-barred and/or moot
  4. 4.Whether this Court can interfere with the running of the union or vary the union dues

Key legal issues

#
01

Compliance with section 27(4) of the Labour Relations Act in amending the union constitution

Holding

The court found the union followed the law in amending its constitution; the Registrar gazetted the notice and published invitations for objections in newspapers, and no effective objection was raised

Reasoning

The National Delegates Conference of 20th February 2021 approved the amendments by vote, notice was given to the Registrar on 26/2/2021, and the Registrar gazetted the amendment on 23/4/2021 with a 21-day objection window, also placing notices in newspapers. The court held the petitioners' objection went to the visibility of the newspaper notices, but found the union had otherwise followed the legal process.

p. 8
02

Whether the court can interfere with the union's determination of its dues

Holding

The court cannot interfere with the running of the union or vary the union dues, since the union, through its delegates, agreed on them; members who feel oppressed have the right to leave the union

Reasoning

Under Article 41(4) every trade union has the right to determine its own administration, programmes and activities. The delegates' conference vote on the dues increase was an internal union decision that the court cannot vary. The corollary of the freedom to join a union is the freedom not to participate, so aggrieved members may exit the union rather than have dues judicially rewritten.

p. 8
03

Correct procedural vehicle for challenging a Registrar's decision

Holding

The proper remedy is an appeal to the Industrial Court within thirty days under section 30 of the Labour Relations Act; a petition was irregular

Reasoning

Section 30 of the Labour Relations Act provides that any person aggrieved by a decision of the Registrar made under the Act may appeal to the Industrial Court within thirty days. The petitioners were aggrieved by the decision to amend the union's constitution and thus had a right to come to court, but by way of appeal, not a constitutional petition. Their choice of a petition was therefore irregular and the petition was struck out.

p. 8

Legal principles established

#
  • A person aggrieved by a decision of the Registrar of Trade Unions must appeal to the Industrial Court within thirty days under section 30 of the Labour Relations Act, and may not instead mount a constitutional petition
  • A trade union has the constitutional right under Article 41(4) to determine its own administration, programmes and activities, including its dues, but must engage its membership before making drastic measures

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The petition is struck out
  2. 2.No orders as to costs

The bench

#

One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.

majority

Wrote the judgment

Jurisdiction invoked
Articles 22(2)(b) and (c), 23, 40, 41 and 47 of the Constitution of Kenya; Labour Relations Act, 2007 (section 30)

Relief refused

#

Declaration that Gazette Notice No. 7 of 2021 is unlawful, null and void

The court found the union followed the law in amending its constitution and the court cannot interfere with the union's internal decisions on dues

p. 8

Orders of certiorari and mandamus (quashing the Gazette Notice and compelling revocation and reimbursement)

The petition was framed irregularly; an aggrieved person should appeal under section 30 of the Labour Relations Act within 30 days rather than file a petition

p. 8

Costs

There shall be no orders of costs.

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.

The petition must therefore fail and is struck out. There shall be no orders of costs.
p. 8Disposition
I find that this court cannot interfere with the running of the respondents union or even vary their union dues, the union having agreed on this.
p. 8Judicial non-interference in union internal affairs
They have a right to come to Court but this should be filed as an appeal. The petitioners chose to file a petition which is irregular.
p. 8Wrong procedural vehicle
The union has as an obligation to engage its membership before making certain drastic measures.
p. 8Duty of union to engage members
The right to form and participate in the activities and programmes of a trade union also envisage the right not to join a trade union and not to participate in its activities.
p. 8Freedom of association - negative right

Issues in the judgment

#
minor

Gazette Notice inconsistently dated/referred to as 'No. 7 of 2021' by the parties and the court, yet the Respondent states it was gazetted on 5th January 2022; the constitutional amendment notice was Gazette Notice No. 3744 of 23/4/2021

minor

The judgment refers to the shop stewards' election as occurring on 21/2/2013, an apparent typographical error for 2023

minor

The Respondent's pleading describes the suit as an 'application' while the Petitioners filed a Petition

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Thuo & 4 others v Kenya Union of Commercial Food and Allied Workers; National Hospital Insurance Fund & another (Interested Parties) (Employment and Labour Relations Cause E049 of 2023) [2025] KEELRC 279 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Petition dated 13th March 2023. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/279/eng@2025-02-06

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