Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCDismissedConstitutional Petition No. E007 of 2026· [2026] KEELRC 2726 (KLR)

County Government Workers Union (K), Vihiga Branch v County Public Service Board, Vihiga & 2 Others

Employment and Labour Relations Court
1 October 2026
DNDavid Nderitu
4,570 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~18 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan court threw out a union's application because it was never anchored on a properly filed petition, so no injunctions protecting county workers were granted.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Applicant, a trade union representing Vihiga County workers, moved the ELRC at Kakamega by notice of motion dated 18th March 2026 seeking temporary injunctions restraining the Respondents from continuing or reopening disciplinary proceedings against county officers, and an order compelling implementation of the Public Service Commission's decision in Appeal No. 200 of 2025, including reinstatement and payment of withheld salaries. The Applicant contended the County Public Service Board lacked quorum when the delegation instrument of 18th November 2025 was made, that quasi-judicial disciplinary powers could not be delegated to executive officers, and that the Respondents were retrying matters already determined by the Commission. The Respondents, through a replying affidavit by Peter Inonda, maintained the delegation was lawful under Section 86 of the County Governments Act, that the Commission's decision required the disciplinary process to recommence with fresh show-cause notices, that salaries had been restored to lawful scales, and raised a preliminary objection on exhaustion of the statutory appeal mechanism. The court framed four issues and disposed of the matter on competency alone: no petition had been filed on the CTS, the primary filing system, and a notice of motion is not a suit or pleading under Rule 2 of the ELRC Rules. Interlocutory relief must be anchored on a properly filed substantive petition; absent one, the prayers were made in a vacuum. Prayer 4 also could not issue interim relief since salaries had been restored. The application was dismissed as incompetent and fatally defective, with costs to the Respondents. The substantive questions on the delegation's validity and Board composition remain open for determination in a properly filed petition.

Key legal issues

#
01

Competency of the application

Holding

The application was fatally defective because no petition was filed on the CTS to anchor it.

Reasoning

The CTS is the primary filing system. Only a hard copy of the petition dated 18th March 2026 was in the court file with no evidence of filing or receipt. A notice of motion is not recognised as a suit or pleading under Rule 2 of the ELRC Rules, so interlocutory prayers predicated on an unfiled petition were made in a vacuum.

p. 22
02

Whether conservatory orders should issue

Holding

No; the interlocutory injunctions could not issue without a properly filed substantive petition, and prayer 4 was overtaken by events.

Reasoning

Interlocutory orders must be predicated on a suit filed as defined by law. Further, the affected employees' salaries had already been restored to lawful scales, and the legality of the delegation instrument and panel composition could only be determined after a substantive hearing.

p. 20

Legal principles established

#
  • An application for temporary or interlocutory relief must be anchored on a properly filed substantive suit or petition; a notice of motion is not itself a suit or pleading under the ELRC Rules.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The application by the Applicant dated 18th March 2026 is incompetent and is hereby dismissed.
  2. 2.Costs to the Respondents.
Jurisdiction invoked
Articles 22, 23, 41 and 47 of the Constitution; Article 162(2); Section 12 of the Employment and Labour Relations Court Act

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "County Government Workers Union (K), Vihiga Branch v County Public Service Board, Vihiga & 2 Others", Case Analysis (2026). Constitutional Petition No. E007 of 2026. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2026/2726/eng@2026-10-01

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