REPUBLIC OF KENYA.
IN THE INDUSTRIAL COURT OF KENYA
AT NAIROBI.
(Before: Charles P. Chemmuttut, J.,
O.A Wafula & J.M. Kilonzo, Members.)
CAUSE NO. 120 OF 2005.
(In the matter of an amended order arising from the award of Murtaza Jaffer, J., P.M. Osero & J.G. Ngolo, Members.)
KENYA HOTELS & ALLIED WORKERS’ UNION....................................................................Claimants.
v.
SOUTHERN PALMS BEACH RESORT ............................................................................ Respondents.
and
KENYA UNION OF DOMESTIC, HOTELS, EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS,
HOSPITALS & ALLIED WORKERS............................................................................ Interested Party.
Issue in Dispute:-
“Refusal to sign Recognition Agreement”.
No appearance for the Claimants (hereinafter called the first Union).
No appearance for the Respondents (hereinafter called the Resort).
No appearance for the Interested Party (hereinafter called the second Union).
INTERPRETATION OF THE AMENDED ORDER.
This second application for interpretation of the amended order in Form “F”, dated 14th July, 2006 under Section 16(5) of the Trade Disputes Act, Cap. 234, Laws of Kenya (which is hereinafter referred to as the Act) was presented to the Court by Mr. Festus Mutunga, Secretary General, for the second Union, on 22nd August, 2006, accompanied by the Applicant’s memorandum in support thereof. The first application for interpretation of the same amended order, under the said section of the Act, was presented by Mr. Salim wa Mwawaza, Executive Officer, F.K.E., for the Resort on 7th August, 2006; and on 10th August, 2006, we summarily rejected the application for interpretation of the amended order as untenable and devoid of merit, pursuant to our observation as follows:-
“…………….. we are of the considered opinion that the amended order is not in contravention of the provisions of the Act and Section 80 of the Constitution; but, on the contrary, the amended order will in fact foster industrial peace and harmony in the Resort and bring or put to an end unions’ rivalry for recognition.”
Accordingly, we directed Mr. Benson Okwayo to proceed with the exercise forthwith.
In our view, there appears to be no ground for interpreting the amended order again as the same is clear and unambiguous, nor is there any other sufficient cause to justify the interpretation of the amended order. Therefore, the Court views the second Union’s conduct in seeking the interpretation of the amended order as contemptuous and gross abuse of the due process of the law.
In the result, we re-affirm the amended order and direct Mr. Benson Okwayo to proceed with the secret ballot immediately.
DATED and given in Nairobi this day of 31st August, 2006.
Charles P. Chemmuttut, MBS.,
JUDGE.
O.A. Wafula, J.M. Kilonzo,
MEMBER. MEMBER.
