Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCDismissedNot stated in the judgment· [2021] KEELRC 1607 (KLR)

Eunice Shamia Lumallas v Parliamentary Service Commission & another [2021] KEELRC 1607 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
20 January 2021
430 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~2 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan employment claim filed three years after resignation survived a limitation challenge because the clock starts when employment ends, not earlier.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Respondents raised a preliminary objection arguing that the Claimant's employment claim was time-barred under Section 90 of the Employment Act, contending that the cause of action arose on 14th October 2013 when the Parliamentary Service Commission's decision was communicated to the Claimant, and that the Court therefore lacked jurisdiction. The Claimant opposed, asserting constructive dismissal on 29th July 2016 and relying on Joseph Aleper v Lodwar Water and Sanitation Company Limited and David Wanjau Muhoro v Ol Pejeta Ranching Limited to argue that the cause of action arose on the date of dismissal and that accrued benefits must be enforced when the employment relationship ends. Significantly, the Respondents' own defence at paragraph 35 dated the accrual of the cause of action to 29th July 2016, when the Claimant resigned and the Commission accepted her resignation, which would have required filing by 29th July 2019. The suit, filed on 26th July 2019, fell within that window. The Court found the objection baseless, dismissed it with costs to the Claimant, and directed that a date be assigned for pre-trial compliance and a subsequent hearing date. The substantive claim remains pending before the Court.

Key legal issues

#
01

Date of accrual of the cause of action for limitation purposes

Holding

The cause of action accrued on 29th July 2016, the date of resignation/constructive dismissal, not 14th October 2013 when the Commission's decision was communicated

Reasoning

The Respondents' own defence dated the accrual of the cause of action to 29th July 2016 when the Claimant resigned and the Parliamentary Service Commission accepted the resignation. Applying the constructive dismissal principles in the authorities relied on by the Claimant, the limitation clock runs from termination of the employment relationship. A suit filed on 26th July 2019 fell within the three-year period prescribed by Section 90 of the Employment Act, so the objection lacked merit.

p. 2
02

Whether the preliminary objection on limitation defeated the Court's jurisdiction

Holding

The preliminary objection was baseless and was dismissed with costs

Reasoning

The Respondents argued that Section 90 of the Employment Act barred the claim because the cause of action arose on 14th October 2013. The Court accepted the accrual date of 29th July 2016 used in the Respondents' own defence, finding the suit filed on 26th July 2019 was within the statutory period. The objection therefore failed to establish a bar on jurisdiction.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • Where an employee's employment ends by resignation or constructive dismissal, time under Section 90 of the Employment Act runs from the date the employment relationship ended, and a suit filed within three years of that date is not time-barred.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The preliminary objection is dismissed with costs to the Claimant
  2. 2.The Court will assign a date for pre-trial compliance and subsequently set a hearing date

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Employment ActSection 90

Cases cited (2)

  • Joseph Aleper & Another v Lodwar Water and Sanitation Company Limited
    [2015] eKLR
  • David Wanjau Muhoro v Ol Pejeta Ranching Limited
    [2014] eKLR
Jurisdiction invoked
Jurisdiction of the Employment and Labour Relations Court over employment claims; limitation governed by Section 90 of the Employment Act

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Eunice Shamia Lumallas v Parliamentary Service Commission & another [2021] KEELRC 1607 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2021). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2021/1607/eng@2021-01-20

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