Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCStruck OutNot stated in judgment· [2022] KEELRC 1328 (KLR)

Ondiek v Peter Gougus & Alice Chemirmir t/a Nakuru Teachers Training College (Cause 78 of 2015) [2022] KEELRC 1328 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
13 July 2022
1,772 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~7 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Claimant sued in March 2015 seeking Kshs.9,720,000/= in salary arrears from 2003 to 2012, leave allowance for the same period, interest, and gratuity. The Respondents initially admitted the court's jurisdiction in their memorandum of response but later filed a preliminary objection dated 17th March 2022 asserting that the cause was time barred under Section 90 of the Employment Act, 2007, and should be struck out. The court directed that the objection be heard by way of written submissions before any further steps. The Respondents argued the claim concerned continuing damage and had to be filed within 12 months of the March 2012 constructive termination; the Claimant contended the reliefs were accrued contractual rights subject only to the three-year limit, and the claim filed in March 2015 was in time. Applying Black's Law Dictionary definitions of continuing damage and injury, the court held that monthly salary and annual leave allowance fell due at the end of each month and year respectively, so their non-payment amounted to a continuing injury, requiring filing within 12 months of the March 2012 cessation. The claim filed in March 2015 was therefore time barred, striking out prayers (a), (b) and (c). The court followed G4S Security Services and Radido J in David Ngala Ochieng', and distinguished Onyango J's underpayment holding. The gratuity claim was also dismissed as unquantified and unsupported by any written contract. The entire claim was struck out with each party bearing own costs.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether salary and leave allowance arrears constitute a continuing injury or damage under Section 90 of the Employment Act

Holding

Monthly salary and annual leave allowance arrears are continuing injury/damage; the claim had to be filed within 12 months of the cessation (termination in March 2012)

Reasoning

The court applied Black's Law Dictionary definitions of continuing damage and continuing injury, holding that salary payable monthly and leave allowance payable yearly became due at those intervals, so non-payment was ongoing. It aligned itself with G4S Security Services and Radido J in David Ngala Ochieng', and declined to follow Onyango J's view on underpayments as not directly on point. Filing in March 2015, three years after termination, was out of time.

p. 3
02

Whether the gratuity claim could survive striking out

Holding

The gratuity claim was dismissed as unquantified and unsupported by any written contract or evidence of willingness by the employer to pay

Reasoning

Gratuity is discretionary absent a written contract; both parties pleaded there was no written contract of service and the Respondents denied liability. The court invoked Section 3(1)(2) of the ELRC Act to resolve the dispute justly, expeditiously and proportionately rather than leave a hopeless claim pending.

p. 4

Legal principles established

#
  • Contractual benefits which accrue at the end of each month, such as monthly salary, amount to continuing injury for purposes of the law of limitation under Section 90 of the Employment Act
  • A preliminary objection on jurisdiction must be dealt with at the earliest opportunity before any further steps in the cause

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The entire claim by the Claimant is struck out
  2. 2.Each party shall bear own costs

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Employment Act, 2007Section 90
  • Employment Act, 2007Section 35
  • Limitation of Actions Act (Cap 22)Section 4(1)
  • Employment Act (Cap 226) (repealed)Repealed by Employment Act 2007
  • Employment and Labour Relations Court ActSection 3(1)(2)

Cases cited (5)

  • Owners of the Motor Vessel Lilian "S" v Caltex Oil (Kenya) Ltd
    (1989) KLR 1
  • Samuel Kamau Macharia v KCB & Others
    (2012) eKLR
  • G4S Security Services (K) Limited v Joseph Kamau & 468 Others
    (2018) eKLR
  • Charles Ogola & 2 Others v Mansion Hart Kenya Limited
    (2019) eKLR
  • David Ngala Ochieng' v Hatari Security Guards Ltd
    (2022) eKLR
Jurisdiction invoked
Employment and Labour Relations Court Act (court admitted jurisdiction in paragraph 28 of the memorandum of response; objection raised under Section 90 of the Employment Act, 2007)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Ondiek v Peter Gougus & Alice Chemirmir t/a Nakuru Teachers Training College (Cause 78 of 2015) [2022] KEELRC 1328 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2022). Not stated in judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2022/1328/eng@2022-07-13

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