Makanga v ABSA Bank Kenya Limited (Formerly Barclays Bank of Kenya) (Miscellaneous Application E365 of 2025) [2025] KEELRC 3683 (KLR) (18 December 2025) (Ruling)

Makanga v ABSA Bank Kenya Limited (Formerly Barclays Bank of Kenya) (Miscellaneous Application E365 of 2025) [2025] KEELRC 3683 (KLR) (18 December 2025) (Ruling)

The Applicant's intended claim is time barred under Section 89 of the Employment Act, 2007. The limitation period lapsed in March 2016, and the court has no jurisdiction or discretion to enlarge time. Any proceedings commenced thereafter are void ab initio. The preliminary objection succeeds and the application is...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2025] KEELRC 3683 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Hellen Wangechi Makanga; Respondent: Absa Bank Kenya Limited (formerly Barclays Bank of Kenya)
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Miscellaneous Application E365 of 2025
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Preliminary Objection
Outcome
Application struck out
Legal Topics
Limitation of Actions, Jurisdiction, Preliminary Objection, Employment Contracts
Source Language
en
Employment Law Limitation of Actions Jurisdiction Preliminary Objection 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 5 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hellen Wangechi Makanga

Applicant

Absa Bank Kenya Limited (formerly Barclays Bank of Kenya)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Preliminary Objection

  1. 1 Whether the Applicant's claim is time barred under Section 89 of the Employment Act, 2007
  2. 2 Whether the court can enlarge time under Section 89 of the Employment Act, 2007

Ratio Decidendi

The Applicant's intended claim is time barred under Section 89 of the Employment Act, 2007. The limitation period lapsed in March 2016, and the court has no jurisdiction or discretion to enlarge time. Any proceedings commenced thereafter are void ab initio. The preliminary objection succeeds and the application is struck out.

Court Disposition

Application struck out

Orders

  • The Respondent's Preliminary Objection is upheld.
  • The Applicant's motion dated 18th September 2025 is struck out.