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

Masoud v Cabinet Secretary for Labour & another; Kenya Revenue Authority (Interested Party) (Judicial Review Application E006 of 2025) [2025] KEELRC 2686 (KLR) (2 October 2025) (Ruling)

[2025] KEELRC 2686 (KLR) Employment & Labour Relations Court
Read PDF
Court
Employment & Labour Relations Court
Case number
2686
Citation
[2025] KEELRC 2686 (KLR)
Decided
2 October 2025
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeJudicial Review ApplicationPostureRespondent's appeal from a previous decisionCoramM MBARŨ
Holding

The court dismissed the application, finding that the applicant does not have locus standi and that the court lacks jurisdiction to determine the application.

Facts

The applicant, Munir Abubakar Masoud, filed a judicial review application against the Kenya Revenue Authority (KRA) and the Cabinet Secretary for Labour, alleging that KRA denies its employees their right to be informed of collective agreements that directly affect their terms and conditions of employment.

Issues

  1. Locus standi of the applicant
  2. Jurisdiction of the court
  3. Proper application of section 10(3)(e), 11, and 15 of the Employment Act

Reasoning

The court ruled that the applicant left the service of KRA 27 years ago and is not an employee, thus not having an employment relationship with KRA. The court also stated that the applicant's application is not within the employment relationship and cannot invoke section 16(4) of the Act.

Outcome

Application dismissed

Authorities cited

Legislation (2)
  • Employment Act
  • Law Reform Act
Cases cited (3)
  • Republic v City Council of Nairobi & another ex parte
  • Okiya Omtatah Okoti v Parliamentary Service Commission & another
  • Republic v Attorney General & another Ex parte James Alfred Koroso
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 0.2 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case