[2019] KEELRC 857 (KLR)
The court found that, pursuant to Section 87 of the Employment Act, 2007, only the Industrial Court had jurisdiction to hear employment disputes at the material time. The suit, having been filed in the Chief Magistrates Court, was incompetent. Furthermore, the court held that the claim could not be transferred to...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2019] KEELRC 857 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Monicah Dorothy; Respondent: The Registered Trustees of Getrudes Garden Children Hospital
- Court
- Employment and Labour Relations Court
- Court Station
- Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Cause 1343 of 2016
- Procedural Posture
- Employment Cause / Ruling on Preliminary Objection
- Outcome
- claim struck out
- Judges
- NJ Abuodha, DI Wasike
- Legal Topics
- Jurisdiction of Employment Court, Limitation Periods, Transfer of Suits
- 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
Monicah Dorothy
Applicant
The Registered Trustees of Getrudes Garden Children Hospital
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Ruling on Preliminary Objection
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Chief Magistrates Court had jurisdiction to hear employment disputes after the enactment of the Employment Act, 2007.
- 2 Whether the claim was filed within the limitation period prescribed by law.
- 3 Whether the suit could be transferred to the Employment and Labour Relations Court.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that, pursuant to Section 87 of the Employment Act, 2007, only the Industrial Court had jurisdiction to hear employment disputes at the material time. The suit, having been filed in the Chief Magistrates Court, was incompetent. Furthermore, the court held that the claim could not be transferred to the Employment and Labour Relations Court due to the lack of jurisdiction in the original court. The claim was therefore struck out as incompetent, with no order as to costs.
Court Disposition
claim struck out
Orders
- The claim is struck out for want of jurisdiction.
- No order as to costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
28 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
EMPLOYMENT AND LABOUR RELATIONS COURT
AT NAIROBI
CAUSE NO 1343 OF 2016
FORMERLY CMCC 8469 OF 2009
MONICAH DOROTHY.....................................................................CLAIMANT
VERSUS
THE REGISTERED TRUSTEES OF
GETRUDES GARDEN CHILDREN HOSPITAL...................RESPONDENT
R U L I N G
1. The claim herein was filed on 10th December 2009. In the plaint, the Claimant averred that she resigned through a letter dated 15th December,2003 giving two months’ notice however upon resignation the respondent neglected or ignored to pay her commission totaling to Kshs. 960,000/=.
2. The respondent has raised objection to the effect that the Claimant was wrong in filing the suit in the Chief Magistrates Court at the time because the Employment Act, 2007 was already in force then and only Industrial Court as it was called then had jurisdiction to hear employment matters.
3. The respondent further contended that the Claimant having resigned in 2003 the cause of action accrued then hence the filing of the suit in 2009 was beyond the limitation period set by the Employment Act.
4. Section 87(a) of the Employment gave jurisdiction to the Jurisdiction Court to hear disputes arising out of out of employment contracts Subsection (2) of the said section barred any Court other than Industrial Court from hearing complaints or disputes arising out of contracts of employment.
5. To that extent the Court finds and holds that the claim as filed in Chief Magistrates Court was incompetent and incapable of being transferred to the present Court
6. The claim is therefore struck out with no order as to costs.
7. It is so ordered.
Dated at Nairobi this 20th day of September, 2019
Abuodha Jorum Nelson
Judge
Delivered this 20th day of September, 2019
Abuodha Jorum Nelson
Judge
In the presence of:-
.................................................for the Claimant and
.................................................for the Respondent.
Abuodha J. N.
Judge