[2014] KEELRC 114 (KLR)

[2014] KEELRC 114 (KLR)

The court held that the applicant's claim was not time-barred under Section 90 of the Employment Act 2007 because the period spent in negotiations between the applicant's former advocates and the employer should be taken into account. The applicant did not accept the settlement terms and promptly instructed new...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2014] KEELRC 114 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Hawkins Wagunza Musonye; Respondent: Rift Valley Railways Kenya Limited
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Mombasa
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Miscellaneous Civil Application 11 of 2014
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Ex Parte Application for Extension of Time
Outcome
application allowed
Legal Topics
Limitation Periods, Termination of Employment, Settlement Agreements
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Limitation Periods Termination of Employment Settlement Agreements

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hawkins Wagunza Musonye

Applicant

Rift Valley Railways Kenya Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Ex Parte Application for Extension of Time

  1. 1 Whether the applicant is barred by limitation under Section 90 of the Employment Act 2007 from bringing a claim after three years from termination.
  2. 2 Whether the period of negotiations between the applicant's advocates and the employer should be considered in computing the limitation period.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the applicant's claim was not time-barred under Section 90 of the Employment Act 2007 because the period spent in negotiations between the applicant's former advocates and the employer should be taken into account. The applicant did not accept the settlement terms and promptly instructed new advocates to pursue the claim once negotiations failed. Therefore, the limitation period had not lapsed, and the applicant was entitled to have his claim filed and registered upon payment of the requisite court fees.

Court Disposition

application allowed

Orders

  • The Statement of Claim attached to the application shall be deemed as duly filed upon payment of the requisite court fees.
  • The claim be registered and summons issued upon the payment of the requisite court fees.