Aura v Tiir Aluminium Industries Limited (Miscellaneous Application E192 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 2539 (KLR)

The court traced its jurisdiction to Article 162(2) of the Constitution and the ELRC Act, which grant exclusive original jurisdiction over employment and labour disputes. Enforcement of a Director's award under WIBA is such a dispute. Rule 69 of the 2024 Procedure Rules expressly allows parties who have resolved a labour dispute through alternative justice systems to apply for adoption of the award for enforcement. The position was affirmed by the Court of Appeal in Charles v Cheto.

The adoption process is purely ministerial: the court converts the award into a judgment for enforcement. Challenges to the merits lie through the Director's review under section 51 WIBA or an appeal under section 52; if time-barred and the party was unaware of the award, judicial review is available. The Respondent's complaints that the revision was outside the permitted timeframe and made without a hearing were merits-based and unexhausted, and its failure to challenge the Director's out-of-time admission of review left that decision unchallenged.

Having found that the reviewed award stood unchallenged and had to be adopted in full, the court credited the Respondent with the Ksh. 1,268,155.00 it had already paid under the consent dated 20th March 2025 and ordered payment of the difference of Ksh. 546,897.00, which attracts interest at court rates from the date of the decision.