[2018] KEELRC 2144 (KLR)

[2018] KEELRC 2144 (KLR)

The court found that the claimant's cause of action arose on 26th May 2004, but the suit was filed on 16th September 2014, more than ten years later. Under section 4(1) of the Limitation of Actions Act, actions founded on contract must be brought within six years. Section 27 does not permit enlargement of time for...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] KEELRC 2144 (KLR)
Parties
Claimant: Humphrey Enock Omukuti; Respondent: KK Group Security Company
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Cause 1629 of 2014
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Ruling on Preliminary Objection
Outcome
preliminary objection upheld; suit dismissed for want of jurisdiction
Judges
MN Nduma, DO Ogal
Legal Topics
Limitation of Actions, Jurisdiction of Court, Employment Contracts
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Limitation of Actions Jurisdiction of Court 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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Humphrey Enock Omukuti

Claimant

KK Group Security Company

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Cause / Ruling on Preliminary Objection

  1. 1 Whether the suit was filed outside the statutory limitation period for employment claims.
  2. 2 Whether the court has jurisdiction to entertain a suit filed out of time under the Limitation of Actions Act.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the claimant's cause of action arose on 26th May 2004, but the suit was filed on 16th September 2014, more than ten years later. Under section 4(1) of the Limitation of Actions Act, actions founded on contract must be brought within six years. Section 27 does not permit enlargement of time for contract claims. The court, therefore, lacked jurisdiction to entertain the suit, as jurisdiction cannot be conferred where the statutory limitation period has expired. The preliminary objection was upheld and the suit dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

Court Disposition

preliminary objection upheld; suit dismissed for want of jurisdiction

Orders

  • The suit is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.