Beatrice Mathenge v Public Service Commission & 2 Others [2014] KEELRC 1111 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Industrial Court ruled an employment claim was filed in time because the three-year clock started when pay was actually adjusted, not when the new salary structure was approved.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the claim is time barred under the Public Authorities Limitation Act
The preliminary objection on limitation was dismissed; the cause of action arose on 1st July, 2010 when the claimant's salary/allowances were adjusted, and the claim filed on 28th June, 2013 was within the limitation period
The respondent argued the cause of action arose on 1st July, 2008 upon approval of the new salary structure. The court instead found accrual on 1st July, 2010 when the claimant's salary/allowances were actually adjusted, with notification by circular/letter of 29th November, 2011. Measured from that accrual date, the claim filed 28th June, 2013 fell within the limitation period, so the objection failed.
Legal principles established
#- Where the cause of action accrues when salary/allowances were adjusted, the limitation period runs from that date, not from the date the employee was informed of the change
Court orders
#- 1.Preliminary objection dismissed
- 2.Claim activated to proceed to hearing
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Industrial Court jurisdiction over memorandum of claim (employment dispute)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Beatrice Mathenge v Public Service Commission & 2 Others [2014] KEELRC 1111 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2014). Memorandum of claim dated 28th June, 2013. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2014/1111/eng@2014-06-27
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.