Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCStruck OutNot stated in judgment· [2020] KEELRC 1592 (KLR)

Rift Valley Railways Workers Union (K) v Rift Valley Railways (K) Limited & another [2020] KEELRC 1592 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
31 January 2020
MOMAUREEN ONYANGO
2,280 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~9 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

The Employment Court struck out a railway workers union's entire claim for a dismissed employee's dues because it was filed late and the claimant could not sue for a deceased person without letters of administration.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The claimant union, Rift Valley Railways Workers Union, filed a claim on 9th August 2018 on behalf of grievant Mr Munyua K. Richard, a Station Master allegedly wrongfully dismissed by Rift Valley Railways (K) Limited, the 1st respondent, seeking notice pay, provident fund, gratuity, maximum compensation, damages, a lump sum, and a declaratory order assigning responsibility for payment to the 2nd respondent, Kenya Railways Corporation. The 1st respondent filed no response. The 2nd respondent opposed the claim through grounds of opposition, a replying affidavit, and a preliminary objection, arguing that under clause 1(g) of the Concession Agreement any claims arising before its termination were the Concessionaire's responsibility, that the court could not rewrite a contract or consent order, and that the claim was time barred under Section 90 of the Employment Act and the union lacked locus standi, the grievant having died on 21st January 2017. The claimant argued the objection grounds were not pure points of law and that the Concession Agreement could not override statute or the Constitution. The court framed two issues: whether the suit was time barred and whether the claimant had locus standi. Holding that the dismissal occurred on 10th January 2014 and the three-year limitation period lapsed on 10th January 2017, while the claim was filed on 9th August 2018, the court found the suit time barred. It further found that neither the union nor the deceased's son, who held no letters of administration, could sue on behalf of the deceased's estate. The entire suit was struck out on 31st January 2020.

Key legal issues

#
01

Limitation of actions in employment claims

Holding

The suit was filed after the three-year limitation period lapsed and therefore fails on that ground alone

Reasoning

The cause of action arose on 10th January 2014 when the dismissal was communicated. Under Section 90 of the Employment Act, the claim had to be filed within three years, i.e. by 10th January 2017. The claim was received in court on 9th August 2018, well after the limitation period lapsed, so the suit must fail.

p. 4
02

Locus standi to sue on behalf of a deceased grievant

Holding

Neither the claimant union nor the deceased's son had locus standi, both lacking letters of administration

Reasoning

The grievant died on 21st January 2017 before the suit was filed. His son swore an affidavit seeking the dues but held no letters of administration, and neither did the union. Under settled law, only an administrator may sue on behalf of a deceased's estate.

p. 4

Legal principles established

#
  • A claim based on employment or contract of service must be instituted within three years of the act complained of, per Section 90 of the Employment Act
  • A party suing on behalf of the estate of a deceased person must have letters of administration

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The entire suit is struck out

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Employment ActSection 90
  • Limitation of Actions Act (Cap. 22)Section 4(1)
  • Kenya Railways Corporation Cap 397 Laws of KenyaSection 3

Cases cited (3)

  • James Heather-Hayes -V- African Medical Research Foundation (AMREF)
    [2014] eKLR
  • Republic v Cabinet Secretary for Internal Security ex parte Gragory Oriaro Nyauchi & 4 others
    [2017] eKLR
  • Bitange Ndemo vs. Director of Public Prosecutions & 4 Others
    [2016] eKLR
Jurisdiction invoked
Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction over employment disputes; limitation under Section 90 of the Employment Act

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Rift Valley Railways Workers Union (K) v Rift Valley Railways (K) Limited & another [2020] KEELRC 1592 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2020). Not stated in judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2020/1592/eng@2020-01-31

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.