Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCPartially AllowedMilimani MCELRC No. E2464 of 2019 (Appeal)· [2025] KEELRC 2348 (KLR)

Kenya Union of Domestic Workers, Educational Institutions Hospitals and Allied Workers (KUDHEIHA) v Mudanya (Appeal E269 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 2348 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court of Kenya at Nairobi
30 July 2025
5,709 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~23 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Employment Court ruled that negligence claims against a trade union for failing to represent a member belong in the ELRC, not the magistrate's court.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This is a first appeal and cross-appeal in the Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi against the judgment of Hon. A. Nyoike (SPM) delivered on 9th September 2024 in Milimani MCELRC No. E2464 of 2019. The respondent, a former union member employed by Sarova Stanley Hotel, sued the union for negligently failing to represent him following his alleged unfair termination, claiming Kshs. 17,988,883. The trial court held it lacked jurisdiction over the claim but nonetheless awarded him Kshs. 1,000,000 in general damages plus half the costs. The union appealed, contending the claim was tortious, time-barred, contrary to privity of contract, and outside the magistrate's pecuniary jurisdiction; the respondent cross-appealed, seeking affirmation of the damages award. J.W. Keli, J allowed the appeal. Relying on Gazette Notice No. 6024, which limits magistrates to employment contract disputes (excluding trade disputes) and statutory offences, the court held that a claim against a union for negligent non-representation under the Labour Relations Act fell within the ELRC's original jurisdiction, not the magistrate's court. Applying Owners of the Motor Vessel 'Lillian S', the court held the magistrate, having found want of jurisdiction, had no authority to award damages. The court also distinguished Seth Panyako v KUDHEIHA, noting the claimant had already sued his employer in ELRC Cause No. 2080 of 2016. The judgment and decree were set aside and the claim dismissed for want of jurisdiction; the cross-appeal was disallowed, with each party bearing their own costs in the claim, appeal and cross-appeal.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the trial court had jurisdiction over the claim against the union

Holding

The magistrate's court lacked jurisdiction. The Gazette Notice restricted magistrates' courts to employment contract disputes (excluding trade disputes) and offences under specified statutes; a claim against a union for negligent non-representation under the Labour Relations Act could only be brought in the ELRC.

Reasoning

The court analysed Gazette Notice No. 6024 which designated magistrates to hear employment contract disputes where gross monthly pay does not exceed KShs 80,000 and specified offences, excluding trade disputes under the Labour Relations Act. The dispute was a member's claim against his union for negligent failure to represent, which is not a trade dispute and does not fall within the designated categories. Such a claim belongs to the ELRC exercising original jurisdiction under Article 162(2).

p. 9
02

Whether the trial court could award damages after finding it lacked jurisdiction

Holding

Having held that it lacked jurisdiction, the trial court had no authority to take any further step, including awarding general damages of Kshs 1,000,000.

Reasoning

Relying on Owners of the Motor Vessel 'Lillian S' v Caltex Oil (Kenya) Ltd, the court reaffirmed that jurisdiction is everything and a court must down tools the moment it holds it lacks jurisdiction. The magistrate having held she lacked jurisdiction on all fronts could not, out of mistaken sympathy, award unpleaded general damages. The award was a nullity.

p. 5
03

Whether the claims could lie against the union absent privity of contract

Holding

The reliefs sought related to the contract of employment and there was no privity of contract between the claimant and the union; unfair termination claims lie only against the employer under section 45 of the Employment Act.

Reasoning

The claimant was employed by Sarova Stanley Hotel, not the union. Claims for unfair termination and terminal dues are claims against an employer under section 45 of the Employment Act. Suing the union in place of the employer after the 2016 claim failed was misconceived, particularly as the claimant had already filed ELRC Cause No. 2080 of 2016 against the employer and did not disclose its outcome.

p. 9
04

Whether the claim was time-barred and whether limitation ran from the 2009 termination

Holding

The court did not find it necessary to resolve limitation definitively since the claim failed for want of jurisdiction; the appellant's contention that the claim was time-barred under the three-year tort limitation period was advanced but the dismissal was grounded on jurisdiction.

Reasoning

The appellant argued the claim was purely tortious and statutorily time-barred under section 4(1) of the Limitation of Actions Act, while the respondent argued a continuing breach by the union extended limitation. Because the court found the claim was outside the magistrate's jurisdiction altogether, the claim was dismissed for want of jurisdiction rather than on limitation grounds, and the cross-appeal on that finding fell away.

p. 11

Legal principles established

#
  • A court without jurisdiction has no power to take any further step, including awarding damages
  • A claim for negligence by a trade union in failing to represent a member falls outside the limited jurisdiction conferred on magistrates' courts by Gazette Notice No. 6024

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The appeal is allowed
  2. 2.The Judgment and Decree of the Hon. A. Nyoike (SPM) delivered on 9th September 2024 in Milimani MCELRC/E2464/2019 is set aside and substituted with an order that the claim is dismissed for want of jurisdiction
  3. 3.The cross-appeal is disallowed
  4. 4.Each party to bear own costs in the claim, appeal and cross-appeal

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Constitution of Kenya, 2010Article 162(2); Article 48
  • Employment and Labour Relations Court Act, 2011 (No. 20 of 2011)Section 12(1); Section 29(3) and (4)(b)
  • Labour Relations Act, 2007Section 2 (definition of trade dispute); Section 39(c)
  • Limitation of Actions ActSection 4(1)
  • Employment Act, 2007Section 45; Section 90
  • Gazette Notice No. 6024Appointment of Magistrates' Courts to Hear Matters Relating to Employment and Labour Relations
  • Gazette Notice No. 9243Revoked conferment

Cases cited (10)

  • Selle v Associated Motor Boat Co.
    [1968] EA 123
  • Mbogo v Shah
    [1968] EA 93
  • Kiamokama Tea Factory Company Ltd v Joshua Nyakoni
    KSI HCCA No. 169 of 2009 [2015] eKLR
  • Kenya Cargo Handling Services Ltd v David Uggwang
    NRB CA Civil Appeal No. 64 of 1984 [1985] eKLR
  • Owners of Motor Vessel 'Lilian S' v Caltex Oil Kenya Ltd
    [1989] KLR / [1989] eKLR
  • Kudheiha Workers Union v Pinewood Beach Resort & Spa
    (Cause E013 of 2023) [2023] KEELRC 1204 (KLR)
  • Kenya Plantation & Agricultural Workers Union v Mahee Flowers Limited
    (Cause E013 of 2021) [2024] KEELRC 307 (KLR)
  • Divecon v Samani
    (1995-1998) EA 48
  • Seth Panyako v Kenya Union of Domestic Hotels Educational Institutions Hospitals and Allied Workers (KUDHEIHA)
    [2013] eKLR
  • Food and Allied Workers' Union v Ngcobo
    [353/12] 2013 [ZASCA] 45 [28th March 2013]
On appeal from
Senior Principal Magistrate's Court at Nairobi (Milimani)
Milimani MCELRC No. E2464 of 2019 (CMEL Suit No. 2464 of 2019)
Jurisdiction invoked
First appellate jurisdiction over the magistrates' court pursuant to the Employment and Labour Relations Court Act and the magistrates' designation under Gazette Notice No. 6024 issued under section 29(3) and (4)(b) of the Employment and Labour Relations Court Act, 2011

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Kenya Union of Domestic Workers, Educational Institutions Hospitals and Allied Workers (KUDHEIHA) v Mudanya (Appeal E269 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 2348 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Milimani MCELRC No. E2464 of 2019 (Appeal). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/2348/eng@2025-07-30

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