Paul Olang' Akeyo v Maurice Abura Owino & 5 others [2016] KEELRC 836 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan employment claim filed over eight years after dismissal was struck out because limitation periods cannot be cured after filing.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Applicable limitation statute
The repealed Employment Act (pre-2007) applies, carrying a 6-year limitation period for contract claims under the Limitation of Actions Act
The Claimant's employment was terminated on 16th September 2004, before the Employment Act 2007 came into force. Relying on Machuka Anyona Julius, the court held the 2007 Act has no retrospective application, so the repealed Employment Act and the 6-year period under the Limitation of Actions Act govern the claim.
Whether the unfair termination claim is time-barred
Yes - the suit filed on 5th February 2013 was more than 6 years after the 16th September 2004 termination
Even under the 6-year limitation applicable under the repealed Employment Act and the Limitation of Actions Act, the suit was filed more than six years after termination. The 2004 complaints to the labour officer and demand letters did not arrest the running of time.
Claims against 5th and 6th Defendants (malicious prosecution, defamation, false imprisonment)
These accrued on acquittal on 13th April 2010, but the Public Authorities Limitations Act requires filing within one year, which the Plaintiff did not show compliance with
The acquittal argument could only support the tort claims against the 5th and 6th Defendants. The Public Authorities Limitations Act requires such claims within twelve months of the cause accruing, and no leave to sue out of time was sought, rendering those claims bad in law on their face.
Legal principles established
#- The Employment Act 2007 has no retrospective application; where employment was terminated before its commencement, the repealed Employment Act applies
- A claim for defamation and false imprisonment against state authorities accrues on acquittal but must be filed within one year under the Public Authorities Limitations Act
- Leave to file suit out of time must be sought before the claim is filed; what is bad in law cannot be cured retrospectively
Court orders
#- 1.The preliminary objections by the Defendants succeed
- 2.The Plaintiff's suit is struck out for being filed outside the limitation period
- 3.Each party shall bear its own costs
- On appeal from
- High Court of Kenya at Kisumu
- Kisumu High Court Case No.9 of 2013
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Transferred from the High Court to the Industrial Court on 12th June 2014 (employment and labour relations jurisdiction); limitation challenged under section 90 of the Employment Act 2007 and the Public Authorities Limitations Act, Cap 39
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Paul Olang' Akeyo v Maurice Abura Owino & 5 others [2016] KEELRC 836 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2016). Kisumu Industrial Cause No. 147 of 2014 (formerly Kisumu High Court Case No. 9 of 2013). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2016/836/eng@2016-05-26
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.