[2022] KEELRC 13208 (KLR)
The court found that the claimants' cause of action, based on alleged breach of contract during employment from 1986 to 1993, had already been adjudicated in two previous suits, both of which were struck out for being filed outside the statutory limitation period. The court held that the present suit was a third...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2022] KEELRC 13208 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: A Loydoms Omedi; Applicant: George Oganga; Applicant: Naboth Ogutu; Applicant: Moses Ochieng; Applicant: Seline Ogambi; Applicant: Dan Tito; Applicant: Samuel Opiyo; Applicant: Omondi Oindo; Applicant: Jane Onyango; Applicant: Jocinter Akinyi; Applicant: Collins Awandu; Applicant: Gilbert Aura; Applicant: John Okoth; Applicant: Fredrick Agwena; Applicant: Monica Adede; Respondent: Kenya Medical Research Institute
- Court
- Employment and Labour Relations Court
- Court Station
- Employment and Labour Relations Court at Kisumu
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Cause E025 of 2022
- Procedural Posture
- Employment Cause / Ruling on Preliminary Objection/strike Out
- Outcome
- Cause struck out for want of jurisdiction due to limitation of actions.
- Judges
- S Radido
- Legal Topics
- Limitation of Actions, Employment Contracts, Jurisdiction, Strike Out Applications
- 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
A Loydoms Omedi
Applicant
George Oganga
Applicant
Naboth Ogutu
Applicant
Moses Ochieng
Applicant
Seline Ogambi
Applicant
Dan Tito
Applicant
Samuel Opiyo
Applicant
Omondi Oindo
Applicant
Jane Onyango
Applicant
Jocinter Akinyi
Applicant
Collins Awandu
Applicant
Gilbert Aura
Applicant
John Okoth
Applicant
Fredrick Agwena
Applicant
Monica Adede
Applicant
Kenya Medical Research Institute
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Ruling on Preliminary Objection/strike Out
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the claim is time-barred under the Limitation of Actions Act and section 90 of the Employment Act 2007.
- 2 Whether the court has jurisdiction to entertain a claim previously struck out for limitation.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the claimants' cause of action, based on alleged breach of contract during employment from 1986 to 1993, had already been adjudicated in two previous suits, both of which were struck out for being filed outside the statutory limitation period. The court held that the present suit was a third attempt to litigate a matter that was conclusively determined as time-barred. The court emphasized that it was bound by the previous decisions and the clear provisions of the Limitation of Actions Act and section 90 of the Employment Act 2007, which bar the court from entertaining claims brought outside the prescribed limitation period. Consequently, the court lacked jurisdiction...
Court Disposition
Cause struck out for want of jurisdiction due to limitation of actions.
Orders
- The instant Cause is struck out.
- No order as to costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
53 paragraphs
Omedi & 14 others v Kenya Medical Research Institute (Cause E025 of 2022) [2022] KEELRC 13208 (KLR) (16 November 2022) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2022] KEELRC 13208 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Employment and Labour Relations Court at Kisumu
Cause E025 of 2022
S Radido, J
November 16, 2022
Between
A Loydoms Omedi
1st Claimant
George Oganga
2nd Claimant
Naboth Ogutu
3rd Claimant
Moses Ochieng
4th Claimant
Seline Ogambi
5th Claimant
Dan Tito
6th Claimant
Samuel Opiyo
7th Claimant
Omondi Oindo
8th Claimant
Jane Onyango
9th Claimant
Jocinter Akinyi
10th Claimant
Collins Awandu
11th Claimant
Gilbert Aura
12th Claimant
John Okoth
13th Claimant
Fredrick Agwena
14th Claimant
Monica Adede
15th Claimant
and
Kenya Medical Research Institute
Respondent
Ruling
1. A Loydoms Omedi and 13 others (the claimants) sued the Kenya Medical Research Institute (KEMRI) on 23 May 2022, alleging breach of contract during employment from 1986 to 1993.
2. Despite the service of notice of summons and the statement of claim, KEMRI did not enter an appearance or file a response.
3. When the cause was mentioned on 28 June 2022, the court directed the claimants to file pleadings in respect of 2 previous cases which had been mentioned in the statement of claim (Kisumu Cause No. 110 of 2015, George Amoth & 14 ors v Kenya Medical Research Institute and Kisumu Cause No. 399 of 2017, George Amoth & 14 ors v Kenya Medical Research Institute).
4. Instead of filing the complete pleadings, the claimants only filed the rulings, which had been delivered in the 2 causes on 12 September 2022.
5. The ruling in Kisumu Cause No. 110 of 2015, George Amoth & 14ors v KEMRI, delivered on 15 September 2016, indicates that the cause of action was founded upon a breach of contract from 1986 to 1993.
6. The court held that the cause had been filed outside the period prescribed by theLimitation of Actions Act and struck it out.
7. Undeterred, the claimants lodged a fresh case, Kisumu Cause No. 399 of 2017, George Amoth & 14 ors v KEMRI, and in a Ruling delivered on 20 December 2017, the court struck out the new suit on the ground of limitation.
8. The claimants have now made a third attempt to resurrect a cause of action in which two judges of this court held were time-barred.
9. Regrettably, the hands of this court are tied by the previous decisions invoking lack of jurisdiction because of the time-bar and the law as set out in the Limitation of Actions Act as read with section 90 of the Employment Act 2007.
10. The Court has no option to strike out the instant Cause and put down its pen. No order on costs.
DELIVERED VIRTUALLY FROM LAMU, DATED AND SIGNED ON THIS 16TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022. RADIDO STEPHEN, MCIARBJUDGEAppearancesClaimants in personRespondent did not participateCourt Assistant Chrispo Aura