Automated Summary
Key Facts
The Employment and Labour Relations Court in Kenya dismissed the respondents' preliminary objections in Petition E140 of 2022. The petitioners, Mary Mugo and Erick Kingdom Sila, challenged the revocation of their appointments to the Kenyatta University Council and the subsequent appointments of interested parties. The respondents argued the court lacked jurisdiction due to no employer-employee relationship and the petitioners' lack of standing, citing precedents like Public Service Commission v Eric Cheruiyot. The court ruled that the petition raised constitutional violations under Articles 22, 23, 258, and 259 of the Kenyan Constitution, granting the petitioners standing to proceed. It emphasized that the Employment and Labour Relations Court's jurisdiction under Article 162(2) and Section 12 of its Act extends to disputes arising from employment, labour relations, and constitutional violations, even if not strictly contractual. Interested parties supported the objections, but the court found them without merit.
Issues
- Whether the petitioners have the requisite standing with the court; and
- Whether there is an employer and employee relationship between the parties to justify the invocation of the court jurisdiction.
Holdings
- The court dismissed the respondents' objections and found that the petitioners have the requisite standing under Articles 22 and 258 of the Constitution, 2010. The petitioners' challenge to the revocation of their appointments to the Kenyatta University Council falls within the court's jurisdiction to address constitutional violations related to employment and labor relations.
- The court determined that its jurisdiction under Article 162(2) of the Constitution and Section 12 of the ELRC Act extends beyond traditional employer-employee relationships to include disputes arising from public service appointments and constitutional protections. The ELRC Act's use of 'including' allows for broader interpretation of employment-related disputes.
Legal Principles
- The court applied judicial review principles to determine its jurisdiction over constitutional violations related to the revocation of appointments to the Kenyatta University Council. It assessed whether the petitioners had standing under Articles 22 and 258 of the Constitution, concluding that the court could adjudicate matters arising from public office appointments and constitutional rights, even if not strictly employer-employee disputes.
- The court adopted a purposive interpretation of Section 12(1) of the Employment and Labour Relations Court Act, emphasizing that the term 'including' in the statute allows for a broad jurisdictional scope aligned with constitutional values. This approach enabled the court to include disputes about public office appointments within its remit, even if not explicitly listed as traditional employment disputes.
Precedent Name
- Elias Kibathi & another v Attorney General
- Joseph Mutuura Mberia & another v Cabinet Secretary for Education, Science and Technology & 2 others
- Public Service Commission & 2 others v Erik Cheruiyot & others
- Sumayya Abtmani Hassan v Paul Masinde Simidi & another
- Alfred Njau & others v City Council of Nairobi
- United States International University (USIU) v Attorney General
- Okiya Omtatah Okoiti v Kenyatta University Council & 4 others
Cited Statute
- Universities Act
- Employment and Labour Relations Court Act, 2011
- State Corporations Act
- Constitution of Kenya, 2010
- Employment Act, 2007
Judge Name
M. Mbarú
Passage Text
- Accordingly, objections by the respondents' are found without merit and are hereby dismissed. The petitioners have proper standing before this court and the court is clothed with jurisdiction to hear and determine the instant petition on the merits.
- The E&LRC Act itself does not confine the court's jurisdiction to employer-employee relationship. The Act confers jurisdiction on the Court- To hear and determine all disputes referred to it in accordance with article 162[2] of the constitution. These disputes, going back to the article, are not restricted to employer-employee disputes, but to employment, and labour relations.
- The petitioners' rights are guaranteed under the constitution and the removal from office and appointment to public office is a matter this court has jurisdiction to hear and determine as held in United States University (USIU) v Attorney general [2012] eKLR.