[2015] KEELRC 1525 (KLR)

[2015] KEELRC 1525 (KLR)

The court found that although the claim was filed more than three years after the cause of action arose, the injury or damage complained of was of a continuous nature and had not abated by the time the claim was filed. Therefore, the claim was filed within the one-year window provided for continuing injury under...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2015] KEELRC 1525 (KLR)
Parties
Claimant: Alfred Mwangi Kaninu; Respondent: Del Monte Kenya Limited
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Cause 195 of 2013
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Ruling on Preliminary Objection
Outcome
preliminary objection dismissed; suit to proceed on merits
Legal Topics
Limitation Periods, Terminal Benefits, Continuing Injury, Employment Contracts
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Limitation Periods Terminal Benefits Continuing Injury Employment Contracts

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 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Alfred Mwangi Kaninu

Claimant

Del Monte Kenya Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Cause / Ruling on Preliminary Objection

  1. 1 Whether the claim is time barred under Section 90 of the Employment Act, 2007.
  2. 2 Whether the nature of the injury or damage is continuous, thus falling within the exception to the three-year limitation period.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that although the claim was filed more than three years after the cause of action arose, the injury or damage complained of was of a continuous nature and had not abated by the time the claim was filed. Therefore, the claim was filed within the one-year window provided for continuing injury under Section 90 of the Employment Act. As such, the claim is not time barred and the preliminary objection is not upheld.

Court Disposition

preliminary objection dismissed; suit to proceed on merits

Orders

  • The preliminary objection is not upheld.
  • The suit shall proceed on its merits.