Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCStruck OutNot stated in the judgment· [2025] KEELRC 2021 (KLR)

Mihadi & 2 others v Otieno & another (Cause E036 of 2021) [2025] KEELRC 2021 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
30 June 2025
HWHellen Wasilwa
917 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~4 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Employment Court struck out a judicial review challenge to a Registrar of Trade Unions decision, confirming that appeals—not judicial review—are the correct route.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This was a ruling on a notice of motion dated 17/6/25 filed by the respondents seeking vacation or setting aside of an ex-parte order issued by the court on 16/6/2025. The respondents, supported by an affidavit of the 1st respondent Nicholas Otieno Ogola, alleged the ex-parte order was obtained through material non-disclosure: the ex-parte applicants failed to disclose a Central Council meeting of 22nd May 2025 at which the General Secretary was found liable on six charges and removed by vote, and a further meeting of 12th June 2025 at which new officials (National Chairman, General Secretary and National Treasurer) were elected; they also alleged the applicants coerced council members to disown the meetings and deliberately failed to serve the 1st respondent. The ex-parte applicants countered that the orders of 16/6/25 were issued in the presence of their advocates' lawyers, were appellate rather than review in nature, and that the Central Council meeting never took place. The court observed that the orders granted were to institute judicial review proceedings and operated as a stay of the Registrar of Trade Unions' orders. Relying on section 30 of the Labour Relations Act, which requires aggrieved persons to appeal to the Industrial Court against decisions of the Registrar, the court held that the ex-parte applicants' recourse to judicial review was an irregularity. It declined to examine the validity of the change of office bearers and struck out the entire judicial review application, including all consequential orders, with no order of costs.

Key legal issues

#
01

Proper remedy against a decision of the Registrar of Trade Unions

Holding

Judicial review was an irregular route; the proper course is an appeal under section 30 of the Labour Relations Act, and the judicial review application was struck out

Reasoning

Section 30 of the Labour Relations Act provides that any person aggrieved by a decision of the Registrar may appeal to the Industrial Court within thirty days. The court held that where a decision of the Registrar of Trade Unions is contested, the aggrieved party must come by way of appeal. The ex-parte applicants instead approached the court by judicial review, which the court found to be an irregularity going to the whole application, warranting striking out with all consequential orders, including the ex-parte stay order.

p. 3
02

Alleged material non-disclosure in obtaining the ex-parte order

Holding

The court did not decide the merits of the non-disclosure allegations, as the application fell with the striking out of the judicial review proceedings

Reasoning

The respondents alleged the ex-parte order of 16/6/2025 was obtained through material non-disclosure, including failure to disclose Central Council meetings of 22nd May and 12th June 2025 at which office bearers were removed and new officials elected. The court expressly declined to consider the validity of the change of office bearers, holding it need not go into that question in view of the jurisdictional defect it had identified, and struck out the entire application instead.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • Where there is contention on any order granted by the Registrar of Trade Unions, the aggrieved party must approach the Industrial Court (ELRC) by way of appeal, not judicial review

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The judicial review application is struck out with all consequential orders therein
  2. 2.No order of costs
Jurisdiction invoked
Section 12 of the Employment and Labour Relations Act; section 30 of the Labour Relations Act 2007

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Mihadi & 2 others v Otieno & another (Cause E036 of 2021) [2025] KEELRC 2021 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/2021/eng@2025-06-30

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