https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2026/1848
The court declined the preliminary objection because the pleadings disclosed no single clear date when the cause of action arose. The record showed conflicting resignation dates and multiple post-resignation acknowledgments, part-payments, and proposed payment plans, so it could not be said at this stage that the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2026] KEELRC 1848 (KLR)
- Parties
- Claimant: John Onyango Omboto; Respondent: Egerton University; 1st Interested Party: Egerton University Sacco Limited; 2nd Interested Party: Board of Trustees, Egerton University Retirement Benefits Scheme
- Court
- Employment and Labour Relations Court
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Cause E075 of 2025
- Procedural Posture
- Employment and Labour Relations Cause / Ruling on Preliminary Objection
- Outcome
- Preliminary objection dismissed/declined
- Judges
- ["J Rika"]
- Legal Topics
- Limitation of Actions, Preliminary Objection, Accrual of Cause of Action, Unpaid Employment Dues, Acknowledgment of Debt, Full Trial Scheduling
- 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
John Onyango Omboto
Claimant
Egerton University
Respondent
Egerton University Sacco Limited
1st Interested Party
Board of Trustees, Egerton University Retirement Benefits Scheme
2nd Interested Party
Procedural Posture
Employment and Labour Relations Cause / Ruling on Preliminary Objection
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the claim was time-barred under section 89 of the Employment Act
- 2 When the cause of action accrued
- 3 Whether the preliminary objection could be sustained on the pleadings and documents alone
Ratio Decidendi
The court declined the preliminary objection because the pleadings disclosed no single clear date when the cause of action arose. The record showed conflicting resignation dates and multiple post-resignation acknowledgments, part-payments, and proposed payment plans, so it could not be said at this stage that the claim was plainly time-barred under section 89 of the Employment Act.
Court Disposition
Preliminary objection dismissed/declined
Orders
- The preliminary objection is declined.
- The claim shall be scheduled for full hearing at the Registry.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
Omboto v Egerton University & 2 others (Cause E075 of 2025) [2026] KEELRC 1848 (KLR) (30 June 2026) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2026] KEELRC 1848 (KLR) Republic of Kenya In the Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nakuru Cause E075 of 2025 J Rika, J June 30, 2026 Between John Onyango Omboto Claimant and Egerton University Respondent and Egerton University Sacco Limited 1st Interested Party Board of Trustees, Egerton University Retirement Benefits Scheme 2nd Interested Party Ruling 1.The Claimant filed this Claim on 8th December 2025. 2.He avers that he was employed by the Respondent as Lecturer in 2015. 3.He states that he resigned on 31st May 2021. 4.He claims unpaid salaries, deferred allowances, unremitted statutory dues, medical claims, amounting to Kshs. 5,905,896. 5.The Respondent filed a Notice of Preliminary Objection, based on Section 89 [formerly 90] of the Employment Act, which places a limitation of 3 years on filing of employment claims, from the date the cause of action arises. 6.The Respondent highlights that the Claimant pleads that he resigned on 31st May 2021.His Claim was filed on 8th December 2025, 4 years later, and is therefore time-barred. 7.It was agreed that the Objection is considered and determined on the strength of the documents and pleadings on record. The Court Find : - 8.There is no clear date when the cause of action arose, as would enable the Court to decline jurisdiction, under Section 89 of the Employment Act. 9.The Claimant avers at page 2 of the Statement of Claim, that he resigned on 31st May 2021. 10.At page 3, the date of resignation changes to 26th February 2021, the date adopted by the Respondent in its Notice of Preliminary Objection. 11.At page 3, the Claimant avers that the Respondent accepted his resignation on 31st September 2023. The Respondent, upon acceptance, instructed the Claimant to fill in the exit form, which he did, in expectation of payment of his dues. 12.He further states at page 4, that the Respondent acknowledged indebtedness, and made part-payments in August 2021 and December 2023. 13.Through an e-mail dated 10th December 2023, the Respondent again acknowledged the debt, and assured the Claimant that payment was being processed. 14.On 3rd March 2025 and 7th May 2025, the Respondent acknowledged indebtedness, and proposed a payment plan. 15.The Claimant approached the Court only when the Respondent, did not pay as promised. 16.The Respondent concedes in the Statement of Response dated 3rd March 2026, that the Claimant unpaid dues are part of the pending bills that the Respondent is owed by the Ministry of Finance. 17.In the circumstances, it is not correct to argue that the cause of action arose on 26th February 2021. 18.The Claim ought to be scheduled for full trial.It is ordered : -a.The preliminary objection is declined.b.The Claim to be scheduled for full hearing at the Registry.c.Costs in the cause. DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED ELECTRONICALLY AT NAKURU, UNDER RULE 68[5] OF THE E&LRC [PROCEDURE] RULES 2024, THIS 30TH DAY OF JUNE 2026.JAMES RIKAJUDGE