Samson Arap Bii & 9 others v Benard Kiplangat Kilele T/A North Njoro Farm & 2 others [2017] KEELRC 1678 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's employment court struck out a claim for 1999–2003 dues because workers waited too long to sue.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the claim was statute barred
The cause of action, being contractual dues for employment accruing 1999-2003, was governed by section 4(1) of the Limitation of Actions Act (6 years) and not section 90 of the Employment Act, 2007, which did not apply retrospectively; suit filed in 2013 was out of time and was struck out
The Employment Act, 2007 commenced on 2 June 2008 and could not apply to dues accruing from 1999 to 2003. The applicable limitation provision was section 4(1) of the Limitation of Actions Act, prescribing six years for contractual disputes, meaning suit should have been filed by end of 2009. Proceedings commenced on 16 August 2013. The 2008 payments related to pre-1999 dues outside the gravamen of the claim, so part acknowledgment under section 23(3) did not assist.
Whether the preliminary objection was defective or an ambush
The objection was neither an ambush nor fatally defective; raising limitation was sufficient to alert the Claimants to its substance
The Claimants did not deny service and did not disclose when service occurred, so the ambush claim failed. The two or so months between filing and hearing was adequate to prepare or file grounds of opposition. On defectiveness, an objection raising limitation sufficiently alerted the Claimants, who were then obliged to re-examine the pleadings to ascertain when the cause of action accrued.
Legal principles established
#- The Employment Act, 2007, having commenced on 2 June 2008, does not apply to causes of action accruing before that date; the Limitation of Actions Act, section 4(1), prescribes a 6-year limitation period for contractual claims
- A payment on account of dues outside the gravamen of the pleaded cause of action does not constitute part acknowledgment for purposes of extending limitation under section 23(3) of the Limitation of Actions Act
Court orders
#- 1.The entire cause of action agitated in the proceedings, being statute barred under section 4(1) of the Limitation of Actions Act, is struck out
- 2.Each party to bear their own costs
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction under the Employment and Labour Relations Court Act over employment disputes
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Samson Arap Bii & 9 others v Benard Kiplangat Kilele T/A North Njoro Farm & 2 others [2017] KEELRC 1678 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2017). Cause No. 262 of 2013. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2017/1678/eng@2017-03-03
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.