[2015] KEELRC 297 (KLR)

[2015] KEELRC 297 (KLR)

The court found that the Collective Bargaining Agreement relied upon by the claimant was registered on 19th April, 2006, after the grievant's termination on 21st March, 2006. In accordance with section 11(2) of the Trade Disputes Act, a Collective Agreement only takes effect upon registration by the Industrial...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2015] KEELRC 297 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Kenya Petroleum Oil Workers Union; Respondent: Total Kenya Limited
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Cause 670 of 2011
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Judgment
Outcome
claim dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Collective Bargaining Agreements, Termination of Employment, Registration of Collective Agreements
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Collective Bargaining Agreements Termination of Employment Registration of Collective Agreements

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kenya Petroleum Oil Workers Union

Applicant

Total Kenya Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Cause / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the claimant is entitled to arrears under the 2005-2006 Collective Bargaining Agreement despite the timing of its registration.
  2. 2 Whether the Collective Bargaining Agreement applied to the grievant at the time of termination.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the Collective Bargaining Agreement relied upon by the claimant was registered on 19th April, 2006, after the grievant's termination on 21st March, 2006. In accordance with section 11(2) of the Trade Disputes Act, a Collective Agreement only takes effect upon registration by the Industrial Court. Since the agreement was not registered at the time of termination, the grievant could not benefit from its provisions. The court relied on precedent to hold that the claim was unsustainable and dismissed it with costs.

Court Disposition

claim dismissed with costs

Orders

  • The claim is dismissed with costs to the respondent.