[2019] KEELRC 2369 (KLR)
The court found that the claimant was dismissed on 5th October 2006 and the suit was filed on 13th December 2012, more than six years after the cause of action arose. Applying Section 4(1) of the Limitation of Actions Act and the binding authority of Divecon Limited v Shirinkhanu Sadrudin Samani, the court held that...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2019] KEELRC 2369 (KLR)
- Parties
- Claimant: Rose Lunani Lukorito; Respondent: Teachers Service Commission
- Court
- Employment and Labour Relations Court
- Court Station
- Employment and Labour Relations Court at Bungoma
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Cause 55 of 2018
- Procedural Posture
- Employment Cause / Ruling on Preliminary Objection
- Outcome
- suit struck out for want of jurisdiction due to limitation
- Legal Topics
- Limitation of Actions, Jurisdiction of Court, Unlawful Dismissal, Preliminary Objection
- 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
Rose Lunani Lukorito
Claimant
Teachers Service Commission
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Ruling on Preliminary Objection
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the suit is statute-barred by the six-year limitation period under the Limitation of Actions Act.
- 2 Whether the court has jurisdiction to entertain a suit filed after the limitation period has lapsed.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the claimant was dismissed on 5th October 2006 and the suit was filed on 13th December 2012, more than six years after the cause of action arose. Applying Section 4(1) of the Limitation of Actions Act and the binding authority of Divecon Limited v Shirinkhanu Sadrudin Samani, the court held that it lacked jurisdiction to entertain the suit as it was statute-barred. The preliminary objection was upheld and the suit was struck out for being filed outside the statutory limitation period.
Court Disposition
suit struck out for want of jurisdiction due to limitation
Orders
- The entire suit is struck out for being filed outside the statutory limitation period.
- No order as to costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
22 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE EMPLOYMENT & LABOUR RELATIONS COURT AT BUNGOMA
CAUSE NO. 55 OF 2018
ROSE LUNANI LUKORITO.......................................................CLAIMANT
VERSUS
TEACHERS SERVICE COMMISSION...............................RESPONDENT
R U L I N G
A preliminary objection was raised before Hon Wasilwa J on the grounds that the suit was time served on 19. 9.2014 and a ruling reserved for 25. 9.2014.
A careful perusal of the record does not show that Hon. Wasilwa J made a ruling on this point at all. There is no written ruling in the file and these parties have been of no assistance on this point. Despite the Claimant raising the issue of resjudicata on this point, the advocate has not provided the alleged ruling by Wasilwa J nor has the Claimant stated the date when the alleged ruling was delivered by Wasilwa J.
This being the case the court is left with no option but to determine the Preliminary Objection afresh.
From the facts not in dispute, the Claimant was dismissed from employment on 5th October, 2006. The suit was then filed on 13th/12/2012 more than six (6) years from the date the cause of action arose.
On the authority of the Court of Appeal in Nairobi Civil Appeal No. 147 of 1997; Divecon Limited -vs- Shirinkhanu Sadrudin Samani in which the court rendered itself.
“ To us, the meaning of Section (1) of the Limitation of Actions Act is clear and beyond doubt. It means no one shall have the right or power to bring after the end of six years from the date on which the cause of action accrued in an action founded in contract. The collorary to this is that no court may or shall have the right or power to entertain what cannot be done namely, an action brought in contract six years after the cause of action arose or any application to extend such time for the bringing of the action.”
The six (6) year limitation period is applicable in this suit. The suit was clearly filed after expiry of a period of six (6) years. Accordingly, the court lacks jurisdiction to entertain this suit and strikes out the entire suit with no order as to costs.
DATED, SIGNED and DELIVERED at BUNGOMA this 1st day of FEBRUARY, 2019.
HON. M. N. NDUMA, JUDGE
EMPLOYMENT AND LABOUR RELATIONS COURT
BUNGOMA
Appearances:
Mr. Anyuor for the Respondent/Objector
Mr. Kraido for Claimant
Chrispo: Court Assistant.