Jarso Jillo Luke v Kenya Wildlife Services [2018] KEELRC 1447 (KLR)
The bottom line
#What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the Court has discretion to extend time for instituting employment claims under section 90 of the Employment Act, 2007
The Court has no power or jurisdiction to extend time; the limitation bar applies to the cause of action itself
Relying on Divecon v Samani, the Court held that the principle in that case, though addressing section 4(1) of the Limitation of Actions Act, applies equally to section 90 of the Employment Act. Limitation statutes vest defendants with substantive rights, and Part III extension provisions do not apply to contract actions. Employment contracts are contracts, so no discretion exists to revive a time-barred cause of action.
Whether the applicant's pleaded circumstances (late communication of the appeal outcome, residence in Moyale, and public importance invoking Articles 10, 41 and 258 of the Constitution) constituted exceptional circumstances
They did not; the settled jurisprudence on limitation in contractual disputes could not be departed from
The applicant argued exceptional circumstances warranting departure from settled limitation jurisprudence, including the Respondent's delayed communication of the appeal decision until 2017 and the public importance of the matter. The Court, however, held that the law is well settled that no discretion exists to extend time for contract-based causes of action, and found it lacked power to grant the orders sought regardless of the circumstances advanced.
Legal principles established
#- No action founded on contract may be brought after six years from the date the cause of action accrued, and no court has power to entertain an action or an application to extend time brought outside the limitation period in contract cases
- A limitation provision confers a substantive, not merely procedural, right; it is the cause of action itself that is barred
Court orders
#- 1.The application dated 26 March 2018 was dismissed with costs to the Respondent
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction under the Employment Act, 2007 and the Constitution (Articles 10, 41 and 258 invoked by the applicant); the Court found it had no power to extend limitation under section 90 of the Employment Act
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Jarso Jillo Luke v Kenya Wildlife Services [2018] KEELRC 1447 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2018). Not stated in judgment (application dated 26 March 2018). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2018/1447/eng@2018-07-20
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.