Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCOtherCause No E001 of 2025· [2025] KEELRC 1972 (KLR)

County Government of Mombasa v Kenya National Union of Nurses (Cause E001 of 2025) [2025] KEELRC 1972 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
3 July 2025
MMM. MBARŨ
1,277 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~5 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Employment Court ruled a county government body can sue over a strike notice even when employment contracts name a different county board.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This ELRC ruling at Mombasa (M. Mbarũ, J) resolves a preliminary objection on locus standi in a suit by a county public service board seeking to have a strike notice dated 16 December 2024, scheduled to take effect on 13 January 2025, declared unprotected. The respondent union raised nine grievances in the notice, which was copied to the Cabinet Secretary for Health, the Public Service Commission, the County Secretary of Mombasa and the County Public Service Board, Mombasa. The respondent objected that the claimant lacked standing under Article 235 of the Constitution and sections 57 and 59 of the County Government Act, which vest county staffing functions in the County Public Service Board, and that its recognition agreement and its members' employment contracts are with the Mombasa County Public Service Board, not the claimant. The respondent counterclaimed that the strike was protected and sought an order directing promotion of its 240 members with salary arrears approved by the SRC. The court, relying on Kisumu County Public Service Board v Samuel Okuro and subsequent ELRC authorities, held that the county government remains the principal even where staffing powers are delegated to the County Public Service Board. The claimant, as the right-holder claiming remedies, had proper standing; any defect lay in possible non-joinder of the entity with delegated mandate, not lack of locus standi. The objection to the claimant's witness was dismissed; the witness who stepped down is to be recalled for cross-examination and the hearing directed to proceed, the merits and counterclaim being left for determination at the full hearing. No costs order was made.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the claimant County Public Service Board has locus standi to sue to declare a strike notice unprotected where the recognition agreement and employment contracts are with the Mombasa County Public Service Board

Holding

The claimant has standing; the distinction between it and the Mombasa County Public Service Board does not defeat locus standi, and any complaint about the body holding delegated mandate goes to non-joinder, not standing. The objection to the witness was dismissed and the hearing ordered to proceed.

Reasoning

Article 176 establishes each county government as a distinct unit and Article 235, read with sections 57 and 59 of the County Government Act, vests staffing functions in the County Public Service Board on behalf of the county government. Although the delegated authority to the County Public Service Board cannot be ignored, the principal remains the county government. Since the claimant as principal claims remedies, it has standing; the absence of the entity with delegated mandate is a non-joinder issue, not one of standing. The court also drew attention to section 59(j) of the CGA on the Board's role regarding remuneration.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • A county government consists of a county assembly and a county executive, and the powers under Article 235 are exercised on its behalf by the County Public Service Board as agent of the county government, not of the governor
  • Where a claimant body has proper standing but the delegated statutory mandate lies with another entity, the defect, if any, is one of non-joinder rather than lack of locus standi

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The objection that Fadhil Maamun is not a proper witness is dismissed
  2. 2.The witness who stepped down shall be recalled for cross-examination by the respondent
  3. 3.The hearing to proceed

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Constitution of Kenya, 2010Article 235
  • Constitution of Kenya, 2010Article 176
  • Constitution of Kenya, 2010Articles 10 and 232
  • County Government ActSections 57 and 59 (including 59(j))
  • Employment and Labour Relations Court ActSection 12

Cases cited (3)

  • Kisumu County Public Service Board & another v Samuel Okuro & 7 others
    [2018] KECA 472 (KLR)
  • Dominic Chungani Muteshi v County Government of Kakamega & another
    [2021] KEELRC 301 (KLR)
  • Tabitha Njambi Chigua & 12 others v County Government of Kiambu
    [2016] KEELRC 74 (KLR)
Jurisdiction invoked
Employment and Labour Relations Court Act, section 12 (employment and labour relations jurisdiction)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "County Government of Mombasa v Kenya National Union of Nurses (Cause E001 of 2025) [2025] KEELRC 1972 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Cause No E001 of 2025. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/1972/eng@2025-07-03

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