africa.lawBeta
SearchAsk AICollectionsJudgesCompareMemo
africa.law

Free access to African legal information. Legislation, case law, and regulatory documents from across the continent.

Resources

  • Legislation
  • Gazettes
  • Jurisdictions

Developers

  • API Documentation
  • Bulk Downloads
  • Data Sources
  • GitHub

Company

  • About
  • Contact
  • Terms of Use
  • Privacy Policy

Jurisdictions

  • Ghana
  • Kenya
  • Nigeria
  • South Africa
  • Tanzania
  • Uganda

© 2026 africa.law by Bhala. Open legal information for Africa.

Aggregating legal information from official government publications and public legal databases across the continent.

Back to search
Case Law[2014] KEIC 122Kenya

Kenya Union of Hair and Beauty Salon Workers v Style Industries Ltd (Cause 578 of 2013) [2014] KEIC 122 (KLR) (Employment and Labour) (1 April 2014) (Ruling)

Industrial Court of Kenya

Judgment

Kenya Union of Hair and Beauty Salon Workers v Style Industries Ltd (Cause 578 of 2013) [2014] KEIC 122 (KLR) (Employment and Labour) (1 April 2014) (Ruling) Kenya Union Of Hair And Beauty Salon Workers v Style Industries Ltd [2014] eKLR Neutral citation: [2014] KEIC 122 (KLR) Republic of Kenya In the Industrial Court at Nairobi Employment and Labour Cause 578 of 2013 Nzioki wa Makau, J April 1, 2014 Between Kenya Union Of Hair And Beauty Salon Workers Claimant and Style Industries Ltd Respondent Ruling 1.The Respondent has raised preliminary objection that goes to an issue of locus. The Claimants, it is submitted are represented by a person who is unqualified in terms of Section 2 of the Labour Relations Act. It’s also submitted that the Claimants have not met the threshold of Section 54(1),54(6) and (7) of the Labour Institution Act. 2.The Claimants has filed suit against the Respondent for remedies that canlie in terms of the Labour Relations Act. It is not lost on the Court that there is no exhibit showing proof of membership in terms of Section 54(6) and (7). Matter was not referred to conciliation in terms of part VIII of the Act. The suit is premature on that score.Page 1 of 2 3.As regards the locus of Mr. James Onkoba Tongi, the Court is inclined to agree that any official of the trade union may take up a cause on behalf ofmembers. Official is defined in Section 2 of the Labour Relations Act as “aduly elected official of a trade union or employers’ organization including a member of the executive and a branch official.” No credentials have been presented by Mr. Tongi to show he is one of such officials as per the law.In the premises I find that the suit is filed by an incompetent person and I hereby strike it out with costs of the Respondent.Orders accordingly. **DATED AND DELIVERED AT NAIROBI THIS 1 ST DAY OF APRIL 2014****NZIOKI WA MAKAU****JUDGE**

Similar Cases

Kenya Union of Commecial Food & Allied Workers v Keroche Industries Ltd & 2 others (Cause 772 of 2010) [2013] KEIC 564 (KLR) (Employment and Labour) (17 December 2013) (Ruling)
[2013] KEIC 564Industrial Court of Kenya78% similar
Kenya Chemical and Allied Workers Union v Kenya Tanning Extracts Company Limited (Cause 695(N) of 2009) [2014] KEIC 725 (KLR) (17 January 2014) (Ruling)
[2014] KEIC 725Industrial Court of Kenya77% similar
Kenya Hotels & Allied Workers Union v Office Restaurant (Cause 98 of 2012) [2013] KEIC 629 (KLR) (26 July 2013) (Ruling)
[2013] KEIC 629Industrial Court of Kenya76% similar
Kenya Hotels & Allied Workers Union v Office Restaurant Ltd (Cause 98 of 2012) [2014] KEIC 97 (KLR) (19 December 2014) (Ruling)
[2014] KEIC 97Industrial Court of Kenya76% similar
Odhiambo & 3 others v Kenya Shoe and Lather Workers Union (Cause 1326 of 2014) [2014] KEIC 849 (KLR) (30 September 2014) (Ruling)
[2014] KEIC 849Industrial Court of Kenya76% similar

Discussion