Kenya Plantation And Agricultural Workers Union & another v KK Promote Farm & another (Cause 201 of 2009) (Employment and Labour) [2011] KEIC 31 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Industrial Court dismissed a union claim because the workers were not union members and the union had no documents to prove its case.
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 four grievants were entitled to salary arrears for October to December 1999 under the Collective Bargaining Agreement
- 2.Whether the grievants, who were not union members and/or not in employment when the CBA was signed, could benefit from Clause 31(a) gratuity and Appendix B daily rates
Key legal issues
#Entitlement of non-union members and former employees to CBA benefits
The grievants, who were not union members and/or not in employment when the CBA was signed, could not reap benefits under that agreement.
The Court noted the parties had a valid recognition agreement and several CBAs. The dispute arose from Clause 31(a) on gratuity and Appendix B on daily rates under the CBA covering 1998-1999. The Respondent argued Atorwa had left employment by the time the CBA was signed on 27th April 2000 and the other three were not unionisable and had received their dues under discharge. The claimant did not dispute receipt of dues. The Court found the grievants were attempting to benefit from a CBA they did not support or belong to.
Evidentiary sufficiency of the claim
The claim as framed and argued was fatally defective for want of supporting information and documentation.
The Court found the claimant failed or neglected to provide substantive information or documentation to support the authenticity of its demands. Additionally, three of the grievants were reported to have received their final dues, a fact the claimant did not dispute, undermining the claim for salary arrears.
Legal principles established
#- A claimant must provide substantive information and documentation to support the authenticity of its demands; a claim unsupported by evidence is fatally defective.
Court orders
#- 1.The claim is dismissed for lack of merit
- 2.Costs in cause
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Dispute referred to the Industrial Court under the Trade Disputes Act (recognition agreement and collective bargaining agreements between the parties)
Relief refused
#Payment of salary arrears (and gratuity) to the four grievants
The claim was fatally defective for lack of supporting documentation, and three grievants had received and signed discharge of their final dues; the grievants were not union members and/or not in employment when the CBA was executed
Costs
Costs in cause.
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 the Court's opine, the grievants are personalities trying to make a futile attempt to reap from a Collective Bargaining Agreement they did not support and or were not members.
The Claimant failed and or neglected to provide substantive information and or documentation to support the authenticity of their demands.
In the circumstances, the Court find that the demand made by the Claimants has no basis and is, therefore, dismissed for lack of merit. Costs in cause. Ordered accordingly.
Issues in the judgment
#The cause title lists the same union as both 1st and 2nd claimant and 'KK Promote Farm' and 'K.K. Promote Farm' as respondents, suggesting duplication or misnomer in the parties' names
Inconsistent spelling of grievant Elisha Manyenga/Mayenga Wako within the judgment
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Kenya Plantation And Agricultural Workers Union & another v KK Promote Farm & another (Cause 201 of 2009) (Employment and Labour) [2011] KEIC 31 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2011). Cause 201 of 2009. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keic/2011/31/eng@2011-05-11
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.