[2019] KEELRC 767 (KLR)

[2019] KEELRC 767 (KLR)

The court found that the claimant's suit was filed more than eight years after the cause of action arose, far exceeding the three-year limitation period prescribed by Section 90 of the Employment Act 2007 and Section 4(1) of the Limitation of Actions Act. The claimant did not seek or obtain an extension of time, nor...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2019] KEELRC 767 (KLR)
Parties
Claimant: Isaiah Simiyu Mulongo; Respondent: Nation Media Group
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Bungoma
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Cause 31 of 2018
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Ruling on Preliminary Objection
Outcome
suit struck out as statute barred; no order as to costs
Legal Topics
Limitation Periods, Jurisdiction of Court, Employment Termination, Contract of Service
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Limitation Periods Jurisdiction of Court Employment Termination Contract of Service

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Isaiah Simiyu Mulongo

Claimant

Nation Media Group

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Cause / Ruling on Preliminary Objection

  1. 1 Whether the suit is statute barred under the Limitation of Actions Act and Section 90 of the Employment Act 2007.
  2. 2 Whether the court has jurisdiction to entertain a suit filed outside the statutory limitation period.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the claimant's suit was filed more than eight years after the cause of action arose, far exceeding the three-year limitation period prescribed by Section 90 of the Employment Act 2007 and Section 4(1) of the Limitation of Actions Act. The claimant did not seek or obtain an extension of time, nor did he provide any justification for the delay. The court, bound by precedent and statutory provisions, held that it lacked jurisdiction to entertain the suit, as it was time-barred. Consequently, the suit was struck out.

Court Disposition

suit struck out as statute barred; no order as to costs

Orders

  • The suit is struck out for being statute barred.
  • No orders as to costs.