[2016] KEELRC 1211 (KLR)

[2016] KEELRC 1211 (KLR)

The court found that the claim for underpayment of salary and shift allowances was based on a continuing breach of the employment contract, which only ceased upon the claimants' retrenchment in October 2014. Section 90 of the Employment Act provides that in cases of continuing injury or damage, the limitation period...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2016] KEELRC 1211 (KLR)
Parties
Claimant: Washington Omolo Owino; Respondent: Rift Valley Railways (K) Ltd
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Mombasa
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Cause 596 of 2015
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion / Ruling on Preliminary Objection (application to Strike Out Parts of Claim as Time Barred)
Outcome
application dismissed
Judges
AN Makau
Legal Topics
Limitation Periods, Continuing Breach, Salary Underpayment, Retrenchment, Employment Contracts
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Limitation Periods Continuing Breach Salary Underpayment Retrenchment Employment Contracts

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Washington Omolo Owino

Claimant

Rift Valley Railways (K) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Notice of Motion / Ruling on Preliminary Objection (application to Strike Out Parts of Claim as Time Barred)

  1. 1 Whether the claim for salary underpayment was filed within the statutory limitation period under section 90 of the Employment Act.
  2. 2 Whether the continuing breach doctrine applies to the claim for underpayment and shift allowances.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the claim for underpayment of salary and shift allowances was based on a continuing breach of the employment contract, which only ceased upon the claimants' retrenchment in October 2014. Section 90 of the Employment Act provides that in cases of continuing injury or damage, the limitation period is twelve months from the cessation of the breach. Since the suit was filed on 13 August 2015, within ten months of the cessation of the breach, it was within the statutory limitation period. The respondent's argument that only claims arising within twelve months prior to the filing date were actionable was rejected as misconceived. The court held that the entire claim was...

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The respondent’s Notice of Motion dated 9.11.2015 is dismissed.
  • Costs in the cause.