Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCStruck OutNot stated in the excerpt· [2025] KEELRC 1708 (KLR)

Monanda & 7 others v Universities' Academic Staff Union (UASU) & 3 others; Registrar of Trade Unions & another (Interested Parties) (Employment and Labour Relations Petition E201 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 1708 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
10 June 2025
3,138 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~13 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

The Employment and Labour Relations Court struck out lecturers' petition against UASU's constitution amendment because they went to court before exhausting the Registrar of Trade Unions process.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Petitioners, lecturers at public universities and members of UASU, filed a petition alleging that they were excluded from the process of amending UASU's constitution culminating in the Proposed UASU Constitution 2024, and sought to halt the amendment process. They invoked Article 22(1) of the Constitution and claimed their rights to public participation and inclusion had been violated. The 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th Respondents filed preliminary objections arguing that the petition offended Section 27(4) of the Labour Relations Act, which requires objections to a proposed change of a union constitution to be lodged with and investigated by the Registrar of Trade Unions before any recourse to the court; that the petition was premature and unripe; that the doctrine of constitutional avoidance applied; and that the 2nd Petitioner lacked locus standi. The Petitioners countered that they had standing and that determination would require fact-finding, making the objections unsustainable per Mukisa Biscuit. The court set out the scheme of Section 27(4): upon receiving a notice of change of a union constitution, the Registrar must give 21 days' notice inviting objections, investigate them, and may refer the matter to the Industrial Court, refuse the amendments, or make any orders deemed fit. Finding that the Petitioners had approached the court before the Registrar followed that process, the court upheld the preliminary objections and struck out the petition with no order of costs. Judgment was delivered virtually at Nairobi by Hellen Wasilwa, Judge, on 10th June 2025.

Key legal issues

#
01

Exhaustion of statutory remedies and ripeness

Holding

The petition was premature because the Petitioners filed it before the Registrar of Trade Unions undertook the process contemplated by Section 27(4) of the Labour Relations Act

Reasoning

The court set out Section 27(4), under which the Registrar must publish 21 days' notice inviting objections, investigate complaints, and may then refer the matter to the Industrial Court (now ELRC), refuse the amendments, or make any orders deemed fit. The Petitioners approached the court before the Registrar followed this process. The court found the respondents' preliminary objections to have merit and struck out the petition.

p. 7
02

Preliminary objections as a pure point of law

Holding

The court accepted the Mukisa Biscuit definition of a preliminary objection, raised on the assumption that all pleaded facts are correct

Reasoning

The Petitioners had argued that the preliminary objections were unsustainable because determination would require fact-finding. The court, however, did not resolve the locus standi or public participation issues on the facts; it disposed of the petition purely on the point of law that the statutory process under Section 27(4) had not been exhausted, rendering the objections sustainable.

p. 6
03

Locus standi of the Petitioners

Holding

Not decided on the merits; the petition failed on the ripeness/exhaustion ground

Reasoning

The Petitioners relied on Article 22(1) of the Constitution and Section 4(2) of the Labour Relations Act, claiming standing as union members excluded from the constitution-amendment process. The Respondents contended the 2nd Petitioner lacked locus standi and the petition was an abuse of process. The court did not make a finding on standing, instead striking the petition out as premature.

p. 7

Legal principles established

#
  • Upon receipt of a notice of change of a union constitution, the Registrar must give 21 days' notice inviting objections, investigate any complaint, and may refer the matter to the Industrial Court, refuse the amendments, or make any orders deemed fit
  • A petition filed before the statutory dispute-resolution process under Section 27(4) of the Labour Relations Act has run its course is premature and unripe for judicial determination

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The preliminary objections raised by the 2nd, 3rd and 4th Respondents are upheld
  2. 2.The petition is struck out with no order of costs
Jurisdiction invoked
Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction under the Labour Relations Act, challenged on the basis of Section 27(4); petition grounded on Article 22(1) of the Constitution

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Monanda & 7 others v Universities' Academic Staff Union (UASU) & 3 others; Registrar of Trade Unions & another (Interested Parties) (Employment and Labour Relations Petition E201 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 1708 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in the excerpt. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/1708/eng@2025-06-10

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