Banking Insurance & Finance Union v Elimu Sacco Society Limited (Cause E054 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 2523 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The Employment Court in Meru refused a union's attempt to switch its case against Elimu Sacco mid-stream, ruling the new unfair-termination claim was a complete departure from the original dispute.
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 Union should be granted leave to amend its Memorandum of Claim to introduce a claim for unfair/unlawful termination of a grievant's contract
- 2.Whether the proposed amendments were a proper amendment or a complete departure from the initial cause of action
Key legal issues
#Whether leave to amend the Memorandum of Claim should be granted
The application for amendment was refused because the proposed amendments introduced a wholly new and different cause of action (unfair termination under the Employment Act, 2007) rather than refining the pleaded organisational-rights dispute under the Labour Relations Act
The initial claim concerned refusal to deduct and remit union dues, an organisational-rights dispute. The proposed amendment sought reliefs for unfair termination and reinstatement of a grievant whose contract allegedly lapsed in April 2024. The court viewed this as a complete abandonment of the initial cause and a radical departure, noting the Union had also not succeeded in prior rulings on the organisational-rights action. The Motion was therefore found without merit and dismissed with costs.
Legal principles established
#- An amendment that abandons the initial cause of action and introduces a radically different one will not be allowed
Court orders
#- 1.The Motion dated 17 October 2024 is dismissed with costs
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction under the Employment and Labour Relations Court Act and the Constitution (not expressly quoted in the judgment)
Relief refused
#Leave to amend the Memorandum of Claim in terms of the draft Amended Memorandum of Claim
The proposed amendment was a radical and complete departure from the initial cause of action concerning organisational rights, amounting to abandonment of the initial claim
Corresponding leave for the Respondent to amend its Memorandum of Reply
Moot as the primary amendment was refused
Costs
Dismissed with costs (costs of the application to the Respondent)
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.
It is clear that the proposed amendment would amount to a complete abandonment of the initial cause of action presented earlier before the Court.
The proposed amendments introduce a radical and complete departure from the initial action by the Union.
In light of the above, the Motion dated 17 October 2024 is found without merit and is dismissed with costs.
Issues in the judgment
#Case number not stated in the judgment text provided
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Banking Insurance & Finance Union v Elimu Sacco Society Limited (Cause E054 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 2523 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in the excerpt (Cause filed 22 January 2024). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/2523/eng@2025-09-25
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.