Anguso v DPL Festive Limited (Appeal E040 of 2025) [2025] KEELRC 2524 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Employment and Labour Relations Court confirmed that only it can enforce workplace injury awards from DOSHS, not Magistrate's courts.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether the trial court had jurisdiction to adopt the award of Kshs.536,121.60 by the DOSHS as its judgment
- 2.Whether the appellant had a legitimate expectation that the suit would proceed to conclusion before the Magistrate's court
Key legal issues
#Jurisdiction of the Magistrate's court to adopt DOSHS awards
The Magistrate's court has no jurisdiction to adopt a DOSHS award as its judgment; enforcement of WIBA awards lies in the Employment and Labour Relations Court.
WIBA, following the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court decisions in the Law Society of Kenya litigation, remained the operational framework for work-injury compensation save Section 7. Section 16 is facilitative, directing aggrieved parties to the Employment and Labour Relations Court for judicial assistance against Director's decisions. The Practice Directions of 28 April 2023 and legitimate expectation did not confer jurisdiction on the Magistrate's court to adopt the award.
Legitimate expectation of claimants with pending suits
Legitimate expectation applies to claims already pending before the courts when WIBA was enacted, but does not confer jurisdiction on the Magistrate's court to adopt DOSHS awards.
The Supreme Court held that claimants in cases pending at the passage of WIBA have a legitimate expectation that their cases would be concluded under the judicial process invoked. However, this suit related to adoption of a DOSHS award, and neither the doctrine nor the practice directions determined the jurisdictional question before the trial court.
Challenge to a DOSHS decision
A party dissatisfied with a DOSHS decision, having not objected under Section 52(1) of WIBA, must seek judicial review before the Employment and Labour Relations Court before adoption of the award.
The Court of Appeal in Thepot Patrick Charles v Joash Shisia Cheto affirmed that the only way to challenge a DOSHS decision not objected to before the Director is a judicial review motion in the ELRC, to be brought before the award is adopted, with a stay of adoption proceedings if already instituted.
Legal principles established
#- A person dissatisfied with a decision of the DOSHS can only seek redress from the Employment and Labour Relations Court.
- The Employment and Labour Relations Court has jurisdiction to enforce awards by the DOSHS.
- The provisions of WIBA are silent on enforcement of awards made by the DOSHS.
Court orders
#- 1.The appeal is dismissed
- 2.Parties shall bear their own costs
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- On appeal from
- Chief Magistrate's Court, Kisumu
- Kisumu MCCC/158/2018
- Jurisdiction invoked
- First appellate jurisdiction over the Chief Magistrate's Court decision (Employment and Labour Relations Court)
Relief refused
#Setting aside the trial court's judgment and adoption of the DOSHS award of Kshs.536,121.60 as an order of the court
The Magistrate's court had no jurisdiction to adopt DOSHS awards; redress lies in the Employment and Labour Relations Court
Costs
Parties shall bear own 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.
In the end it is the finding of the court that the instant appeal is devoid of merit and it is accordingly dismissed. Parties shall bear own costs.
The foregoing sentiments of the Court leave no doubt that a person who is dissatisfied with a decision of the DOSHS could only seek redress from the Employment and Labour Relations Court.
where the court laid it bare that Employment and Labour Relations Court had the jurisdiction to enforce awards by the DOSHS
neither the practice directions or the decisions nor the doctrine of legitimate expectation determined the question of jurisdiction to adopt awards of the DOSHS which was the issue before the court
Issues in the judgment
#Typographical rendering errors in the judgment text ('efiective' for 'effective', 'afirmed' for 'affirmed', 'difierent' for 'different').
The case number field in the coram portion reflects only the trial suit number; the appeal's own file number is not stated in the judgment text.
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Anguso v DPL Festive Limited (Appeal E040 of 2025) [2025] KEELRC 2524 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Kisumu MCCC/158/2018 (appeal therefrom; ELRC appeal at Kisumu). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/2524/eng@2025-09-22
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.