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

Iloti & 14 others (Acting on Their Behalf and on Behalf of Dock Workers Union of Kenya) v Sang & another; Dock Workers Union of Kenya (Interested Party) (Petition E004 of 2025) [2025] KEELRC 808 (KLR) (13 March 2025) (Ruling)

[2025] KEELRC 808 (KLR) Employment & Labour Relations Court
Read PDF
Court
Employment & Labour Relations Court
Case number
808
Citation
[2025] KEELRC 808 (KLR)
Decided
13 March 2025
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

TypePetitionPosturePetition to strike outCoramM MBARŨ
The petition is struck out with costs.

Facts

The petitioners are dock workers union officials who claim the 1st respondent convened a meeting in their absence and sought to suspend them as officials and trustees in violation of the union constitution. The 1st respondent has since removed the petitioners from the list of registered officials and trustees of the interested party trade union.

Issues

  • Whether the petition is a proper petition under the Labour Relations Act and the Constitution.
  • Whether the petition should be converted to an ordinary Memorandum of Claim under the Employment and Labour Relations Court (Procedure) Rules.

Reasoning

The court finds the petition does not meet the threshold for a proper petition under the Labour Relations Act and the Constitution. The court also notes that the orders sought can be addressed in an ordinary suit under a Memorandum of Claim.

Outcome

Struck out with costs

Orders

  • The petition is struck out with costs.

Authorities cited

Legislation (3)
  • Labour Relations Act
  • Employment and Labour Relations Court (Procedure) Rules
  • Constitution of Kenya
Cases cited (2)
  • Njue v Kenya Maritime Authority & another [2023] KEELRC 820 (KLR)
  • Ngure v Tear Fund [2023] KEELRC 1324 (KLR)
⚠ 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