[2018] KEELRC 2199 (KLR)
The court found that the claim was filed more than three years after the cause of action arose, contrary to Section 90 of the Employment Act, 2007. The statutory limitation period for employment claims is three years, and the court has no jurisdiction to entertain claims filed outside this period. The court adopted...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2018] KEELRC 2199 (KLR)
- Parties
- Claimant: Gregory Kyalo Nzoka; Respondent: Teachers Service Commission
- Court
- Employment and Labour Relations Court
- Court Station
- Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Cause 376 of 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Employment Cause / Ruling on Preliminary Objection
- Outcome
- claim dismissed for being time barred
- Judges
- HS Wasilwa
- Legal Topics
- Limitation Periods, Jurisdiction of Court, Unlawful Termination, Employment Contracts
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Gregory Kyalo Nzoka
Claimant
Teachers Service Commission
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Ruling on Preliminary Objection
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the claim is time barred under Section 90 of the Employment Act, 2007.
- 2 Whether the court has jurisdiction to entertain a claim filed outside the statutory limitation period.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the claim was filed more than three years after the cause of action arose, contrary to Section 90 of the Employment Act, 2007. The statutory limitation period for employment claims is three years, and the court has no jurisdiction to entertain claims filed outside this period. The court adopted its reasoning from a similar case (Cause No. 378/2017) and held that the claim was time barred. Consequently, the claim was dismissed in its entirety for want of jurisdiction due to lapse of the statutory limitation period.
Court Disposition
claim dismissed for being time barred
Orders
- The claim is dismissed in its entirety for being time barred.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
23 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
THE EMPLOYMENT AND LABOUR RELATIONS COURT
AT NAIROBI
CAUSE NO. 376 OF 2017
(Before Hon. Justice Hellen S. Wasilwa on 13th March, 2018)
GREGORY KYALO NZOKA ……………......…CLAIMANT
VERSUS
TEACHERS SERVICE COMMISSION ……RESPONDENT
RULING
1. The Application before Court is the Preliminary Objection raised by the Respondent Applicants herein that the Court lacks jurisdiction to entertain this claim for being time barred.
2. The Respondent Applicants have submitted that the cause of action arose on 17. 5.2012 and this claim was filed on 7. 2.2017 4 years, 8 months and 22 days after the decision to terminate the Claimant was made. The Respondents therefore submit that the claim is time barred and this Court has no jurisdiction to entertain it.
3. The Respondent Applicants cited Re The Matter of theInterim Independent Electoral Commission (2011 ) eKLR where a 7 Judge bench rendered itself as follows:-
“That jurisdiction flows from the law, and the recipient Court is to apply the same, with any limitations embodied therein. Such a Court may not arrogate to itself jurisdiction through the craft of interpretations, or by way of endeavours to discern or interpret the intentions of Parliament, where the working of legislation is clear and there is no ambiguity. In the case of the Supreme Court, Court of Appeal and High Court, their respective jurisdictions are donated by the Constitution”.
4. The Claimant herein was dismissed in the same day as the Claimant in Cause No. 378/2017 and they filed their claims on the same day.
5. This Court has already determined that the Claimant in Case No. 378/2017 field her claim beyond the 3 years window period as provided under Section 90 of Employment Act 2007 which states as follows:-
“Notwithstanding the provisions of section 4(1) of the Limitation of Actions Act, no civil action or proceedings based or arising out of this Act or a contract of service in general shall lie or be instituted un less it is commenced within three years next after the act, neglect or default complained or in the case of continuing injury or damage within twelve months next after the cessation thereof”.
6. I adopt my arguments in the said ruling and also find that this claim is time barred and therefore it is improperly before my Court. This Court cannot assume jurisdiction over the same. The claim is therefore dismissed in its entirety for being time barred.
Dated and delivered in open Court this 13th day of March, 2018.
HON. LADY JUSTICE HELLEN WASILWA
JUDGE
In the presence of:
Museve holding brief for Mwalimu for Claimant – Present
Oyucho for Respondent – Present