Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCPartially AllowedNotice of Motion dated 5th May 2025· [2025] KEELRC 2714 (KLR)

Banking Insurance And Finance Union v Apa Insurance Company Ltd (Cause E415 of 2025) [2025] KEELRC 2714 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
3 October 2025
SRStella Rutto
2,275 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~9 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan employer cannot force a union to pay for meeting space, but the union cannot force the employer to send workers to union meetings.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Claimant union moved the Court by Notice of Motion dated 5th May 2025 seeking orders directing the Respondent employer to allow it access to the Respondent's premises to organise, educate and recruit unionisable employees, to allow workers to join a trade union of their choice, and to comply with a settlement signed before the Conciliator. The dispute arose after the Respondent declined the Claimant's request of April 2024 for access, leading to a trade dispute reported to the Ministry of Labour and a settlement agreement dated 6th November 2024 granting the union access from 7:00–7:30 a.m. and after 5:30 p.m. The Respondent, through its HR Manager Yvonne Maloba, contended it complied with the settlement by granting access outside working hours, but required the union to pay venue booking fees, and denied any obligation to notify employees or ensure their attendance at union meetings. The Claimant, through Tom Odero, maintained that reasonable access means access to employees at their workplace, not a hired venue, and invoked Section 56 of the Labour Relations Act. The Court framed a single issue: whether the Applicant had made out a case for the orders sought. It held that conditioning access on payment for a venue is not reasonable access under Section 56 and imposes an unreasonable burden on the union, but also held that reasonable access does not oblige the employer to actively mobilise employees for union recruitment. The Court found the Motion partly merited and directed the Respondent to grant reasonable access outside official working hours, or during working hours without disrupting operations, with no order as to costs.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether conditioning union access to employer premises on payment for a meeting venue constitutes reasonable access

Holding

It does not; making access conditional upon payment is an unreasonable burden and falls outside Section 56 of the Labour Relations Act

Reasoning

Section 56 entitles a trade union to reasonable access to an employer's premises for lawful activities including recruitment and education, subject only to reasonable operational or safety conditions. The Respondent allowed access only subject to venue payment, which the Court held fails the test of reasonableness and imposes an unreasonable burden on the union.

p. 4
02

Whether the employer is obliged to notify employees and ensure their attendance at union recruitment meetings

Holding

No; the employer need not take an active role in assisting union recruitment

Reasoning

The Court agreed with the Respondent that reasonable access does not entail actively assisting the union recruit members. Requiring the employer to ensure attendance of all employees goes beyond the scope of Section 56 and amounts to an overreach by the union. Access must be balanced against the employer's operational prerogatives.

p. 5

Legal principles established

#
  • Requiring a trade union to pay for a venue as a precondition to meeting unionisable employees is not 'reasonable access' under Section 56 of the Labour Relations Act
  • Reasonable access balances the union's right to organise with the employer's prerogative to manage its operations, and does not obligate the employer to actively mobilise employees for union meetings

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The Respondent is directed to grant the Claimant reasonable access to its premises for purposes of recruitment and other lawful union activities, provided such access takes place outside official working hours or, if during working hours, does not disrupt the Respondent's operations
  2. 2.There shall be no order as to costs

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Labour Relations ActSection 56
  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 21 Rule 1
  • Civil Procedure ActSection 1B
  • Constitution of KenyaArticle 159(2)(d)
  • Constitution of KenyaArticle 48
Jurisdiction invoked
Trade dispute settlement before the Conciliator under the Labour Relations Act; Section 56 of the Labour Relations Act (jurisdiction provision not expressly cited)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Banking Insurance And Finance Union v Apa Insurance Company Ltd (Cause E415 of 2025) [2025] KEELRC 2714 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Notice of Motion dated 5th May 2025. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/2714/eng@2025-10-03

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