Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCAllowedCause No. 98 of 2001· [2002] KEELRC 35 (KLR)

AMALGAMATED UNION OF KENYA METAL WORKERS v BAHARINI RETREADING & RUBBER LTD [2002] KEELRC 35 (KLR)

Industrial Court of Kenya
28 August 2002
CCCharles P. Chemmuttut
347 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~1 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Industrial Court turned a signed union recognition settlement into a binding award, requiring a fresh check-off and recognition once 51% of unionisable employees join.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This first-instance Industrial Court award at Mombasa arose from a dispute referred to the court by the Minister for Labour on 25th October 2001 under Section 8 of the Trade Disputes Act, Cap. 234, concerning recognition of the Amalgamated Union of Kenya Metal Workers by Baharini Retreading & Rubber Ltd. The Minister's reference was accompanied by a statutory certificate from the Labour Commissioner under Section 14(9)(e) of the Act, received by the court on 30th October 2001. The Union filed its memorandum on 13th December 2001 and the Company filed a belated reply on 27th August 2002. Before hearing, on 28th August 2002 the parties presented a memorandum of settlement signed by Mr. Justus M. Otakwa and Mr. David Wegullo for the Union and Mr. Moiz Alibhai, Director, for the Company, witnessed by Mr. J.N. Namasake of the Federation of Kenya Employers. The settlement provided for a fresh check-off by employees willing to join the Union and for recognition once the Union attained 51% of the 8 unionisable employees. Chemmuttut, J, found the terms fair and reasonable and entered an award by consent in terms of the settlement. The award was dated and given at Mombasa on 28th August 2002. No costs order was made and no authorities were cited.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the court should adopt the parties' memorandum of settlement as an award by consent

Holding

The court adopted the settlement as an award, having found its terms fair and reasonable.

Reasoning

The Minister for Labour had referred the dispute over recognition to the court under Section 8 of the Trade Disputes Act, Cap. 234. After the filing of pleadings, the parties presented a signed memorandum of settlement providing for a fresh check-off and recognition upon attainment of 51% of the 8 unionisable employees. The court found the terms fair and reasonable and, as prayed, made an award in terms of the settlement.

p. 1

Legal principles established

#
  • The Industrial Court may enter an award by consent where the parties present a memorandum of settlement whose terms the court finds fair and reasonable.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Award entered by consent in terms of the memorandum of settlement, namely: that a fresh check-off be signed by employees willing to be members of the Union; and that once the Union attains 51% of the 8 unionisable employees, the Company will recognise the Union
Jurisdiction invoked
Section 8 of the Trade Disputes Act, Cap. 234 (reference by the Minister for Labour)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "AMALGAMATED UNION OF KENYA METAL WORKERS v BAHARINI RETREADING & RUBBER LTD [2002] KEELRC 35 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2002). Cause No. 98 of 2001. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2002/35/eng@2002-08-28

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.