[2023] KECA 183 (KLR)

[2023] KECA 183 (KLR)

The Court of Appeal held that, following the dissolution of the 2nd respondent as a trade union and the confirmation of this fact by the Registrar of Trade Unions, there was no longer a competing trade union in the aviation industry. As a result, the original basis for the judicial review proceedings—namely, the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2023] KECA 183 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Kenya Aviation Workers Union; Respondent: Registrar Of Trade Unions; Respondent: Aviation & Airport Services Workers Union
Court
Court of Appeal
Court Station
Court of Appeal at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Appeal 23 of 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
appeal allowed
Judges
DK Musinga, K M'Inoti, GWN Macharia
Legal Topics
Trade Union Registration, Dissolution of Trade Unions, Judicial Review, Labour Relations Act
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Trade Union Registration Dissolution of Trade Unions Judicial Review Labour Relations Act

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kenya Aviation Workers Union

Appellant

Registrar Of Trade Unions

Respondent

Aviation & Airport Services Workers Union

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the dissolution of the 2nd respondent renders the appeal moot.
  2. 2 Whether the registration of the appellant as a trade union in the aviation industry remains valid in the absence of another union.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal held that, following the dissolution of the 2nd respondent as a trade union and the confirmation of this fact by the Registrar of Trade Unions, there was no longer a competing trade union in the aviation industry. As a result, the original basis for the judicial review proceedings—namely, the existence of two registered trade unions in the same sector—no longer existed. The 1st respondent did not oppose the appeal, and there was no live controversy to be resolved. The court therefore allowed the appeal, set aside the orders quashing the appellant's registration, and directed that each party bear its own costs.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

  • The appeal is allowed.
  • Each party to bear its own costs.