Jimnah Muchiri v Agrcultural Society of Kenya [2021] KEELRC 944 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Employment Court dismissed a volunteer's unfair termination claim because volunteer allowances don't create employment and claims must be filed within three years.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Limitation under section 90 of the Employment Act
The claim, filed more than five years after the cause of action accrued on 9th September 2011, was barred by the three-year limitation period
Section 90 imposes a three-year bar on proceedings to enforce rights under employment contracts, subject to a continuing-injury exception. The cause of action arose on 9th September 2011 when the Claimant was asked to step aside. The claim was filed on 30th June 2017, over five years later. No constitutional plea with specificity was made to escape limitation. Limitation deprives the court of jurisdiction.
Jurisdiction under section 12 of the ELRC Act - existence of an employment relationship
There was no employer-employee relationship; the Claimant was a volunteer, so the court lacked jurisdiction
The Claimant's own pleadings and evidence admitted voluntary service on committees with attendance allowances only. Documents lacked particulars of a contract of service under section 10 of the Employment Act (pay, leave, pension, notice, work hours). He was not managed by the HR department. Allowances alone do not make a volunteer an employee. A jurisdictional connection to employment was therefore absent.
Status of the withdrawn, leave-less amended Statement of Claim
The court would rely only on the original Statement of Claim; the amended one was invalid for want of leave and had been withdrawn
Rule 14 of the ELRC (Procedure) Rules, 2016 permits amendment without leave only before pleadings close; thereafter leave is required. The amended Statement of Claim filed without leave was invalid, and the Claimant's advocates had applied to withdraw it, yet parts of the case were premised on it.
Reopening of the limitation point after dismissal of the preliminary objection
The point could properly be revisited after evidence, as the earlier ruling only held it unfit to be determined preliminarily
The 13th February 2019 ruling did not dispose of the limitation issue on the merits; it held that evidence was needed. A party need not plead a point of law to canvass it (rule 14(3) does not make pleading obligatory), and in any event paragraph 25 of the Memorandum of Response was wide enough to ground it.
Legal principles established
#- A limitation objection goes to the jurisdiction of the court
- Payment of an allowance to a volunteer does not constitute him an employee
- For the ELRC to assume expanded jurisdiction, the dispute must be connected to employment and labour relations directly or indirectly
- Constitutional pleadings must specify the constitutional provisions allegedly violated
Court orders
#- 1.Declined the prayer for a declaration that the Claimant was improperly terminated contrary to the Employment Act
- 2.Held the Claimant is not entitled to the compensatory damages prayed for
- 3.Dismissed the suit with costs to the Respondent
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Section 12 of the Employment and Labour Relations Court Act; sections 10 and 90 of the Employment Act
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Jimnah Muchiri v Agrcultural Society of Kenya [2021] KEELRC 944 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2021). Cause No 1227 of 2017. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2021/944/eng@2021-09-13
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.