[2016] KEELRC 1054 (KLR)
The court held that section 90 of the Employment Act and section 4(1) of the Limitation of Actions Act do not provide for extension of time to bring actions based on contracts. Therefore, once the limitation period has elapsed, no extension is permissible for such actions. The application for extension of time to...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2016] KEELRC 1054 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Venerandah Woka Bukhala; Respondent: Equatorial Commercial Bank
- Court
- Employment and Labour Relations Court
- Court Station
- Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- ? 40 of 2015
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time
- Outcome
- application dismissed with costs
- Judges
- NJ Abuodha
- Legal Topics
- Limitation Periods, Extension of Time, Employment Contracts
- 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
Venerandah Woka Bukhala
Applicant
Equatorial Commercial Bank
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the court has jurisdiction to extend time for filing a suit under section 90 of the Employment Act after the limitation period has lapsed.
- 2 Whether section 4 and section 27 of the Limitation of Actions Act permit extension of time for actions based on contract.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that section 90 of the Employment Act and section 4(1) of the Limitation of Actions Act do not provide for extension of time to bring actions based on contracts. Therefore, once the limitation period has elapsed, no extension is permissible for such actions. The application for extension of time to file suit was dismissed as the court lacked jurisdiction to grant the extension sought under the relevant statutory provisions.
Court Disposition
application dismissed with costs
Orders
- The application for extension of time is dismissed with costs to the respondent.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
26 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE EMPLOYMENT AND LABOUR RELATIONS COURT
AT NAIROBI
MISC NUMBER 40 OF 2015
VENERANDAH WOKA BUKHALA……………………………CLAIMANT
VERSUS
EQUATORIAL COMMERCIAL BANK……………………..RESPONDENT
RULING
1. The applicant herein seeks extension of time to file a suit against the respondent. The application is based on the grounds among others that between the year 2008 to 2011 the applicant underwent prosecution at the instigation of the respondent who accused her of stealing. She was acquitted on 17th May, 2011.
2. The Court will not go into the merits and demerits of the facts upon which the application is based or opposed but will seek an understanding of section 90 of the Employment Act as read with section 4 of the Limitation of Actions Act.
3. Section 90 of the Employment Act provides as follows:-
“…Notwithstanding the provisions of section 4(1) of the Limitation of Action Act, no civil action or proceedings based or arising out of this Act or a contract of service in general shall lie or be instituted unless it is commenced within three years next after the act, neglect or default
complained or in the case of a continuing injury or damage, within twelve months next after the cessation thereof.”
4. Section 4 (1) of the Limitation of Action Act lists actions which may be brought prior to expiry of six years from the date on which the cause of action accrued. Section 4(2) of the said Act however provides that actions based on tort may not be brought after expiry of three years from the date on which the cause of action accrued.
5. However, under section 27 of the Act, actions based on tort may be brought after the expiry of three years provided the Court has granted leave to do so prior to or after the commencement of the action.
6. Section 90 of the Employment Act referred to above, as well as section 4(1) of the Limitation of Actions Act do not provide for extension of time to bring actions based on contracts. This therefore means no extension of time is permissible for these actions once limitation has elapsed. To this extent this application cannot be granted hence stands dismissed with costs.
7. It is so ordered.
Dated at Nairobi this 24th day of June 2016
Abuodha Jorum Nelson
Judge
Delivered this 24th day of June 2016
In the presence of:-
……………………………………………………………for the Claimant and
………………………………………………………………for the Respondent.
Abuodha Jorum Nelson
Judge