Universities Academic Staff Union (UASU) & another v General & another; Kenyatta University Chapter Election Board & 19 others (Interested Parties) (Civil Appeal E301 of 2024) [2025] KECA 2022 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Court of Appeal upheld the rejection of UASU Kenyatta University Chapter's election results because the elections ignored court-ordered timelines and procedures.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.The nature of the elections that were directed to be held by the order made in Petition No. E043 of 2021
- 2.Whether the directions issued in Petition No. E043 of 2021 were complied with in the subsequent elections
- 3.Whether the learned Judge was correct in arriving at the decision arrived at
Key legal issues
#Compliance with court orders directing fresh elections
The fresh elections of 27th February 2023 did not comply with the orders in Petition No. E043 of 2021 because the register was not updated and inspected afresh and the elections were not held within 60 days of the judgment.
The elections were initially slated for 15th September 2022 but were stayed until 24th February 2023. The court had stipulated that the members' register be updated, inspected and the elections conducted within 60 days. The strict timelines were meant to keep the register up to date; a five-month lull during which court battles raged could not be in sync with that decision.
Notice period under the Union's constitution
The UASU constitution contemplated a continuous 14-day notification of the election date, which was not met where the notices ran with breaks in between.
The learned Judge found, and this Court agreed, that although the appellants argued the aggregate notices totalled 14 or 15 days, the constitution required the notice to run concurrently for 14 days, and with the six-month gap between the first notice and the ruling a fresh notice was prudent.
Validity of the Registrar's refusal to register the elected officials
The Registrar acted within her powers in refusing to register the new officials because the elections were not conducted in accordance with the court orders.
Having established that the fresh elections did not satisfy the Union's constitution and the orders in Petition No. E043 of 2021, the Registrar was entitled to reject the application to register the new officials; the appellants' rights were not violated.
Legal principles established
#- Where elections are conducted pursuant to a court order, the court's directions must be adhered to; a party who finds an order irregular or incapable of performance must return to the court for revision, interpretation or variation rather than purporting to comply with it in a mutated form.
- An appellate court is slow to reverse a trial court's findings of fact unless it is shown that the trial court took into account matters it should not have, failed to take into account matters it should have, misapprehended the evidence, or acted on wrong principles.
Court orders
#- 1.The judgment delivered on 9th February 2024 in ELRC Constitutional Petition No. E157 of 2023 is upheld, save that the timelines start running from the date of the Court of Appeal judgment
- 2.No order as to costs
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
Wrote the judgment
Wrote the judgment
- On appeal from
- Employment and Labour Relations Court
- ELRC Constitutional Petition No. E157 of 2023
- Jurisdiction invoked
- First appeal to the Court of Appeal from the Employment and Labour Relations Court (Nairobi Civil Appeal Number E534 of 2021)
Relief refused
#Declaration that the Registrar's refusal to register the Chapter's officials violated the appellants' fundamental rights under Articles 41 and 47 of the Constitution
The fresh elections did not comply with the court orders in Petition No. E043 of 2021 and the Union's constitution, so the Registrar acted within her powers
Costs
We make no order as to costs.
Quotable passages
#Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.
We uphold the judgement delivered on 9th February 2024 in ELRC Constitutional Petition No. E157 of 2023, save that we now order that the timelines start running from the date of this judgement.
where a party is of the view that an order, as issued, may cause undue hardship in terms of its implementation, the recourse is to apply for an appropriate variation thereto, rather than giving it a difierent complexion and purporting to comply with it, in that mutated form.
where elections are being conducted pursuant to an order of the court, those directions must be adhered to unless, in giving directions, the court failed to address its mind to certain necessary steps
We make no order as to costs.
Issues in the judgment
#The judgment inconsistently dates the judgment in Petition No. E043 of 2021 as delivered on 20th August 2021 while the trial court's orders are referred to as of 21st August 2021.
The trial court's petition is dated 9th August 2021 in the conclusion, though the petition triggering the appeal is ELRC Petition No. E157 of 2023 (petition dated 9th August 2023 according to context).
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Universities Academic Staff Union (UASU) & another v General & another; Kenyatta University Chapter Election Board & 19 others (Interested Parties) (Civil Appeal E301 of 2024) [2025] KECA 2022 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Nairobi Civil Appeal Number E534 of 2021. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2025/2022/eng@2025-11-28
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.