Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCStruck OutELRC Cause dated 7 August 2019 (number not stated in judgment)

Hassan v County Government of Wajir & another (Cause 513 of 2019) [2025] KEELRC 1120 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
8 April 2025
RSRadido Stephen
1,062 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~4 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Wajir county officer's lawsuit was struck out because he skipped the mandatory appeal to the Public Service Commission before going to court.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Claimant, formerly a Chief Officer with the County Government of Wajir, sued the County Government and the County Public Service Board on 7 August 2019, alleging unfair and unlawful withholding of salary, non-payment of employee dues and accrued rights, and compensation for wrongful and unlawful action. His employment followed an Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission communication reporting that investigations had established he used falsified documents to secure employment; the County Public Service Board advised the Governor to terminate the contract, the salary was stopped, and the Governor terminated the employment. The Respondents filed a Notice of Preliminary Objection on 25 November 2024 contending that the Claimant, a public officer whose service falls within the public service under Articles 232, 233, 234 and 260 of the Constitution, was obliged to appeal to the Public Service Commission under section 77 of the County Governments Act and section 87(2) of the Public Service Commission Act before coming to court, and that the ELRC is not a court of first call over disciplinary control of public officers. The Claimant did not file submissions as directed. The Court held that the Claimant ought to have appealed to the Public Service Commission against the decision to stop his salary, that section 87(2) prohibits court proceedings before exhaustion of that appellate process, and that no exceptional circumstances justified bypassing it. Applying the Court of Appeal decision in Hulbhai Gedi Abdille, the Court upheld the preliminary objection and struck out the Cause with costs, delivered virtually, dated and signed in Nakuru on 8 April 2025.

Questions the Court framed

#

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

  1. 1.Whether the Claimant was required to exhaust the appellate remedies before the Public Service Commission under section 77 of the County Governments Act and section 87(2) of the Public Service Commission Act before filing suit
  2. 2.Whether the Notice of Preliminary Objection dated 25 November 2024 is merited and whether the Court lacks jurisdiction over the Claimant's Statement of Claim

Key legal issues

#
01

Exhaustion of statutory remedies before filing suit in the ELRC

Holding

The Claimant ought to have appealed to the Public Service Commission under section 77(1) and (2)(b)(c) & (g) of the County Governments Act before moving the Court, and did not do so; the preliminary objection therefore succeeds.

Reasoning

The EACC reported the Claimant had used falsified documents to secure employment; his salary was stopped and employment terminated. Section 77 of the County Governments Act provides for appeals to the Public Service Commission against decisions on disciplinary control and remuneration, and section 87(2) of the Public Service Commission Act prohibits court proceedings before exhausting that process. The appellate jurisdiction is anchored in Article 234(2)(i) of the Constitution and accepted by the Court of Appeal in Hulbhai Gedi Abdille. No exceptional circumstances justified bypassing the process.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • A public officer aggrieved by a county public service board decision on disciplinary control or remuneration must appeal to the Public Service Commission before filing proceedings in court, per section 77 of the County Governments Act and section 87(2) of the Public Service Commission Act.
  • The prohibition in section 87(2) of the Public Service Commission Act bars legal proceedings in court before exhaustion of the appellate process.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The Notice of Preliminary Objection dated 25 November 2024 is upheld
  2. 2.The Cause is struck out with costs

The bench

#

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

RS
majority

Wrote the judgment

Jurisdiction invoked
Employment and Labour Relations Court Act (jurisdiction of the ELRC); no specific constitutional article invoked as basis of the court's own jurisdiction

Relief refused

#

Claimant's claims for unfair and unlawful withholding of salary, non-payment of employee dues and accrued rights, and compensation for wrongful and unlawful action

Failure to exhaust the statutory appellate process before the Public Service Commission, and no exceptional circumstances shown for bypassing it

p. 3

Costs

The Cause is struck out with costs (to the Respondents)

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 subsection prohibits legal proceedings in Court before the exhaustion of the appellate process.
p. 3effect of section 87(2) Public Service Commission Act
The appellate jurisdiction of the Public Service Commission is anchored in Article 234(2)(i) of the Constitution.
p. 3constitutional basis of PSC appellate jurisdiction
The Court finds merit in the Notice of Preliminary Objection.
p. 3determination
The Notice of Preliminary Objection dated 25 November 2024 is upheld with the consequence that the Cause is struck out with costs.
p. 3final orders

Issues in the judgment

#
minor

Internal date inconsistency: the EACC letter is dated 6 February 2019, but the notice of stoppage of salary and termination is dated 13 February 2018, a year earlier.

minor

Text contains typographical rendering of 'officer'/'offices' as 'oficer'/'ofiends', and the Statement of Claim date is given as 7 August 2019 with no cause number stated.

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Hassan v County Government of Wajir & another (Cause 513 of 2019) [2025] KEELRC 1120 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). ELRC Cause dated 7 August 2019 (number not stated in judgment). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/1120/eng@2025-04-08

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