[2017] KEELRC 360 (KLR)

[2017] KEELRC 360 (KLR)

The court found that the claimant was dismissed on 13th June 2013 but filed his claim on 12th July 2016, more than three years after the cause of action arose. Section 90 of the Employment Act 2007 prescribes a three-year limitation period for employment claims. As the claim was filed outside this period, the court...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2017] KEELRC 360 (KLR)
Parties
Claimant: Athmani Mchemi Mghalu; Respondent: Guard Force Limited
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Mombasa
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Cause 541 of 2016
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Judgment
Outcome
claim dismissed for want of jurisdiction
Legal Topics
Unfair Termination, Limitation of Actions, Temporal Jurisdiction
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Unfair Termination Limitation of Actions Temporal Jurisdiction

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Athmani Mchemi Mghalu

Claimant

Guard Force Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Cause / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the claim was filed within the statutory limitation period under Section 90 of the Employment Act 2007.
  2. 2 Whether the court has jurisdiction to hear and determine the claim given the time elapsed since dismissal.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the claimant was dismissed on 13th June 2013 but filed his claim on 12th July 2016, more than three years after the cause of action arose. Section 90 of the Employment Act 2007 prescribes a three-year limitation period for employment claims. As the claim was filed outside this period, the court held that it lacked temporal jurisdiction to hear and determine the dispute. Consequently, the claim was dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

Court Disposition

claim dismissed for want of jurisdiction

Orders

  • The claim is hereby dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
  • No order on the costs.