Transport Workers' Union v Automobile Association of Kenya; Kenya Long-Distance Truck Drivers and Allied Workers' Union (Interested Party) (Cause 1520 of 2016) [2025] KEELRC 2446 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Employment Court refused to reopen census cost orders, confirming that recognition agreements are revoked by the National Labour Board, not judges.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether the Court should review and/or revise its Ruling of 26 September 2023 to direct that the parties share equally the costs of the repeat census ordered by the Court
- 2.Whether the Court can issue enforceable orders on the funding of the repeat census where the Claimant Union lacks funds and declines to cooperate
Key legal issues
#Review of a prior order on costs of a court-ordered census
The Court declined to issue the orders sought, finding the Claimant Union was stonewalling cooperation with expeditious resolution of the dispute, and declined to grant further enforceable orders
The Motion sought review of the 26 September 2023 Ruling to allocate census costs. The Court had previously directed equal sharing of the repeat census costs on 25 February 2025, but the Claimant Union failed to comply for want of funds. The Court observed that the Claimant Union had sued to assert its rights but was now obstructing the resolution of the dispute, and that the recognition agreement issues lay outside its mandate. It therefore declined to issue any orders.
Mandate to revoke a recognition agreement
Revocation of a recognition agreement is a matter for the National Labour Board, not the Court, and the Respondent had not moved the Board
The background disclosed that the Interested Party and Respondent signed a recognition agreement in July 2016 while the Respondent had a subsisting recognition agreement with the Claimant Union. The Court held that revocation of a recognition agreement is within the mandate of the National Labour Board, which the Respondent had not approached, and that the unions had not referred a trade dispute to the Cabinet Secretary under section 54(6) of the Labour Relations Act.
Legal principles established
#- The revocation of a recognition agreement is not within the mandate of the Court but of the National Labour Board
- A party which invokes the Court's jurisdiction to assert its rights must cooperate in the expeditious and proportionate resolution of the dispute
Court orders
#- 1.The Court declines to issue any of the orders sought in the Motion dated 18 December 2024 or any further enforceable orders
- 2.Each party to bear own costs
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Inherent review/revision powers of the Employment and Labour Relations Court over its own orders in a Cause filed in 2016 (reference to sections 59, 60, 54 and 48 of the Labour Relations Act, 2007)
Relief refused
#Review and/or revision of the Ruling delivered on 26 September 2023 to order the parties to share equally the census costs
The Claimant Union is stonewalling cooperation with the expeditious resolution of the dispute; the mandate to revoke a recognition agreement lies with the National Labour Board, not the Court; and no trade dispute has been referred to the Cabinet Secretary, Labour as contemplated by section 54(6) of the Labour Relations Act
Costs
Each party to bear own 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.
In light of the above, the Court declines to issue any of the orders sought in the Motion dated 18 December 2024 or any further enforceable orders.
Each party to bear own costs.
It is not the mandate of the Court to revoke a recognition agreement, and the mandate lies with the National Labour Board.
The Claimant Union moved the Court seeking to assert its rights, but it is now stonewalling in cooperating with the Court in an expeditious and proportionate resolution of the dispute with finality.
Issues in the judgment
#The case number and neutral citation of the Cause are not stated anywhere in the judgment, despite the record referring to a Cause filed in 2016
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Transport Workers' Union v Automobile Association of Kenya; Kenya Long-Distance Truck Drivers and Allied Workers' Union (Interested Party) (Cause 1520 of 2016) [2025] KEELRC 2446 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/2446/eng@2025-09-18
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.