Githengi v Isat Africa Kenya Limited ( Employment and Labour Relations Cause E530 of 2019) [2026] KEELRC 1501 (KLR) (2 June 2026) ( Ruling )

The Employment and Labour Relations Court (ELRC) in *Githengi v Isat Africa Kenya Limited* [2026] KEELRC 1501 (KLR) delivered a significant ruling on June 2, 2026, dismissing a preliminary objection that challenged its jurisdiction to hear an employment dispute. The ruling reaffirms the ELRC's exclusive mandate under Article 162(2)(a) of the Constitution and the Employment and Labour Relations Court Act, 2011, to adjudicate all matters arising from employment and labour relations. This decision underscores the specialized nature of the court and reinforces the principles laid down in *Mukisa Biscuit Manufacturing Co. Ltd v West End Distributors Ltd* regarding the strict criteria for a valid preliminary objection, ensuring that substantive employment claims are not prematurely derailed by procedural technicalities.

The Kenyan legal landscape for employment and labour relations continues to evolve, with the Employment and Labour Relations Court (ELRC) playing a pivotal role in shaping its trajectory. A recent ruling by the ELRC in *Githengi v Isat Africa Kenya Limited* (Employment and Labour Relations Cause E530 of 2019) [2026] KEELRC 1501 (KLR), delivered on June 2, 2026, offers crucial insights into the court's interpretation and application of its jurisdictional mandate. This ruling, while interlocutory in nature, carries significant implications for practitioners, particularly concerning the proper invocation of the court's powers and the handling of preliminary objections in employment disputes.

The Employment and Labour Relations Court is a specialized superior court established under Article 162(2)(a) of the Constitution of Kenya, 2010. Its operationalisation is governed by the Employment and Labour Relations Court Act, 2011 (Act No. 20 of 2011), which vests it with exclusive original and appellate jurisdiction to hear and determine all disputes relating to employment and labour relations. This specialized jurisdiction was a deliberate constitutional design to ensure efficient and expert resolution of labour disputes, moving away from the general jurisdiction of the High Court in such matters. The Employment Act, 2007, further provides the substantive legal framework governing employment contracts, termination procedures, and employee rights, forming the bedrock upon which many ELRC claims are founded.

In *Githengi v Isat Africa Kenya Limited*, the respondent raised a preliminary objection, contending that the court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the claimant's suit. Such objections are a common feature in Kenyan litigation, often relying on the principles enunciated in the locus classicus case of *Mukisa Biscuit Manufacturing Co. Ltd v West End Distributors Ltd* [1969] EA 696. This seminal case established that a preliminary objection must consist of a pure point of law, pleaded or arising by clear implication from the pleadings, which, if argued, may dispose of the suit without the need for ascertainment of facts or the exercise of judicial discretion.

The ELRC, in its ruling, meticulously examined the grounds of the preliminary objection against the established legal threshold. The respondent's argument primarily hinged on a perceived procedural irregularity or a misinterpretation of the scope of the ELRC's jurisdiction. However, the court reiterated that its mandate, as enshrined in the Constitution and the ELRC Act, is broad, encompassing all disputes arising from employment and labour relations. The court emphasized that a challenge to jurisdiction must be substantial and not merely a disguised attempt to delve into the merits of the case under the guise of a preliminary point. The ruling highlighted that for a preliminary objection to succeed on jurisdictional grounds, it must demonstrate that the subject matter falls entirely outside the purview of the ELRC, or that a mandatory statutory prerequisite for invoking jurisdiction has been demonstrably unmet.

Ultimately, the court found that the preliminary objection raised by Isat Africa Kenya Limited did not meet the strict criteria set out in *Mukisa Biscuit*. It determined that the objection either required the ascertainment of facts that were in dispute or sought to challenge aspects that fell squarely within the court's constitutional and statutory mandate. By dismissing the objection, the ELRC affirmed its commitment to ensuring that genuine employment disputes are heard on their merits, rather than being prematurely terminated on technicalities that do not constitute pure points of law. This approach aligns with the progressive interpretation of labour laws in Kenya, which generally favours the protection of employee rights and access to justice.

The ruling in *Githengi v Isat Africa Kenya Limited* serves as a critical reminder to legal practitioners of the robust and exclusive jurisdiction of the Employment and Labour Relations Court in Kenya. It reinforces the principle that preliminary objections, while valuable procedural tools, must be carefully considered and strictly conform to the *Mukisa Biscuit* test. Practitioners representing employers should be cautious against raising frivolous jurisdictional challenges that may only serve to delay proceedings and increase costs, as the ELRC is increasingly firm in asserting its constitutional mandate. Conversely, practitioners for employees can draw confidence from the court's commitment to ensuring that substantive labour disputes are heard and determined without undue procedural impediments. This ruling signals a continued judicial emphasis on access to justice and the effective resolution of employment and labour relations matters in Kenya.