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

Universities Academic Staff Union (Pwani University Chapter) v Pwani University; Universities Academic Staff Union (UASU) (Interested Party) (Petition E004 of 2023) [2023] KEELRC 2377 (KLR) (28 September 2023) (Judgment)

[2023] KEELRC 2377 (KLR) Employment & Labour Relations Court
Read PDF
Court
Employment & Labour Relations Court
Case number
2377
Citation
[2023] KEELRC 2377 (KLR)
Decided
28 September 2023
Beta Machine-generated summary. Automatically produced by AI from the judgment text — it may be incomplete or inaccurate. Always verify against the full judgment below. Not legal advice.

Summary at a glance

TypeLabor DisputePosturePetition and ApplicationCoramM MBARŨ
The court finds the CBA dated 10 May 2017 enforceable and orders the respondent to continue paying the petitioner's members their full salary until the retirement age of 75 years.

Facts

The petitioner, Universities Academic Staff Union (Pwani University Chapter), filed a petition against Pwani University and an interested party, Universities Academic Staff Union (UASU), seeking orders to quash retirement notices, declare discriminatory practices, and promote three members.

Issues

  • Validity of retirement notices issued by the respondent
  • Discriminatory treatment in promotions
  • Enforceability of the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA)

Reasoning

The court acknowledges the CBA dated 10 May 2017 but notes its pending registration. The court orders interim measures to prevent premature retirements and promotes three members.

Outcome

The court dismisses the petition and orders interim measures.

Orders

  • Interim orders to prevent premature retirements
  • Order to continue paying members' salaries until retirement age of 75 years
  • Promotion of three members

Remedies

  • Interim measures to prevent premature retirements
  • Promotion of three members

Authorities cited

Legislation (1)
  • Constitution of Kenya
⚠ This summary is experimental and generated by a language model, not a lawyer. It can contain errors, omissions, or misinterpretations and must not be relied on for legal decisions. The authoritative source is the full judgment. Please confirm every point against the original before use.
Full judgment 0.2 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case