[2021] KEELRC 2014 (KLR)

[2021] KEELRC 2014 (KLR)

The court found that the individuals cited for contempt were not members of the County Public Service Board nor accounting officers and therefore lacked the authority or responsibility to implement or halt payroll deductions. Evidence showed that the deductions in question were made at the express request of...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] KEELRC 2014 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Kenya National Union of Nurses; Respondent: Kakamega County Public Service Board
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Kisumu
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Cause 63 of 2020
Procedural Posture
Labour Cause / Ruling on Contempt Application
Outcome
application dismissed with costs to the respondent
Legal Topics
Unfair Labour Practices, Wage Deductions, Contempt of Court, Employee Association Rights
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Unfair Labour Practices Wage Deductions Contempt of Court Employee Association Rights

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kenya National Union of Nurses

Applicant

Kakamega County Public Service Board

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Labour Cause / Ruling on Contempt Application

  1. 1 Whether the cited individuals were in contempt of court orders regarding wage deductions.
  2. 2 Whether the deductions from nurses' wages were unlawful or unprocedural.
  3. 3 Whether the application for contempt was merited.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the individuals cited for contempt were not members of the County Public Service Board nor accounting officers and therefore lacked the authority or responsibility to implement or halt payroll deductions. Evidence showed that the deductions in question were made at the express request of employees who had formed a welfare group, and no affected employee had objected to or complained about the deductions. The complaint originated solely from the union's branch secretary, not from the employees themselves. There was also no evidence that the respondent failed to act on requests from union members who wished to stop the deductions. As such, the application for contempt...

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs to the respondent

Orders

  • The Motion dated 2 November 2020 is dismissed with costs to the respondent.