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

Kenya Union of Domestic, Hotels, Education Institutions, Hospitals, and Allied Workers v Bom of Motigo Secondary; Principal/Secretary (BOM) (Intended Contemnor) (Cause E003 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 3357 (KLR) (28 November 2025) (Ruling)

[2025] KEELRC 3357 (KLR) Employment & Labour Relations Court
Read PDF
Court
Employment & Labour Relations Court
Case number
3357
Citation
[2025] KEELRC 3357 (KLR)
Decided
28 November 2025
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeContempt of CourtPostureRespondent Responded to Chamber SummonsCoramAnna Ngibuini Mwaure
Holding

The Contempt of Court Act, 2016 is found to be null and void, and the court will revert to the Civil Procedure Act and Judicature Act for guidance in terms of disobedience of court orders.

Facts

The Claimant/Applicant filed Chamber Summons seeking orders that the Principal/Secretary to the Board of Management be directed to comply with court orders.

Issues

  1. Whether the application is merited
  2. Whether the Contempt of Court Act, 2016 is constitutional

Reasoning

The court considered the application and supporting affidavit, and found that the Contempt of Court Act, 2016 was found to be null and void due to lack of public participation and constitutional requirements.

Outcome

The court declared the Contempt of Court Act, 2016 null and void and directed the Principal/Secretary to the Board of Management to comply with court orders.

Orders

  • Claimant is awarded costs of this Application
  • The Principal/Secretary is summoned to show cause why he should not be cited for contempt on 18th December 2025

Remedies

  • Award of costs to the Claimant

Authorities cited

Legislation (3)
  • Civil Procedure Act
  • Judicature Act
  • Contempt of Court Act, 2016
Cases cited (1)
  • Kenya Human Rights Commission V Attorney General; Law Society of Kenya (Interested Party) [2018] KEHC 9656 (KLR)
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 0.1 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case