SheriaNet for Android — search and read Kenyan case law from your phone, offline.
Join the beta →

National Land Commission v Munubi & 4 others (Civil Appeal 248 of 2020) [2022] KECA 391 (KLR) (4 March 2022) (Judgment)

[2022] KECA 391 (KLR) Court of Appeal
Read PDF
Court
Court of Appeal
Case number
391
Citation
[2022] KECA 391 (KLR)
Decided
4 March 2022
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
Typecivil appealPostureappeal from the judgment of the Employment and Labour Relations CourtCoramD. K. MUSINGA, W. KARANJA, P. O. KIAGE
Holding

The cross appeal succeeds only in respect of prayer No. 2 to the extent that a declaration is issued that the Cross appellants/respondents' rights under Articles 28, 41 and 47 of the Constitution were violated.

Facts

The 1st to 4th respondents were directors of the National Land Commission (NLC) seconded from the Public Service Commission (PSC). Their terms of employment were varied without their consent, from contractual to permanent and pensionable, then reversed. They moved to the Employment and Labour Relations Court seeking declarations and alleging unfair labour practice.

Issues

  1. whether the respondents are and remain permanent and pensionable employees of the NLC
  2. whether the change of their terms of employment constitutes unfair labour practice, is unlawful and illegal

Reasoning

The court found that the respondents' constitutional rights were violated and ordered a declaration of such violation. The court also ordered that the respondents be paid their salaries for the time they were unable to access their offices.

Outcome

Appeal and cross-appeal successful

Orders

  • a declaration of violation of the respondents' constitutional rights
  • a declaration that the Cross appellants/respondents' rights under Articles 28, 41 and 47 of the Constitution were violated
  • costs of the appeal and the cross appeal are awarded to the respondents/cross appellants

Remedies

  • declaration of violation of constitutional rights
  • declaration of violation of rights under Articles 28, 41 and 47 of the Constitution
  • payment of salaries for the time respondents were unable to access their offices
Experimental AI summary generated by a language model, not a lawyer. It may contain errors or omissions and must not be relied on for legal decisions — the full judgment below is the authoritative source.
Full judgment 0.3 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case