Yamba v Kenya Revenue Authority (Cause E097 of 2021) [2023] KEELRC 1486 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Employment Court dismissed a claim filed 14 years late, confirming the three-year time limit under section 90 of the Employment Act cannot be sidestepped by framing a claim as a constitutional rights violation.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the court can extend time for filing an employment claim outside the period prescribed by section 90 of the Employment Act
No - there is no basis or discretion to enlarge time; the claim is time barred and the court lacks jurisdiction
The court accepted that the suit was filed outside the three-year limitation period in section 90 of the Employment Act. Relying on prior decisions including Anderson Nganga Maina v National Cereals and Produce Board and the decision in Petition No. 250 of 2019, the court found that commonplace employment claims must follow the substantive and procedural rules of the Employment Act and that invoking constitutional guarantees (Article 47 fair administrative action) cannot circumvent the limitation bar. The court sympathised with the claimant's illness but held its hands were tied.
Whether a claim framed as a constitutional rights violation (Article 47) escapes the Employment Act limitation regime
No - the claim concerned commonplace employment issues and the constitutional framing cannot cure a statutory time bar
The claimant argued his claim derived from the constitutional right to fair hearing and could not be limited by an Act, and that section 22 of the Limitation of Actions Act (disability) saved his claim. The court, citing Jane Angila Obando v TSC, held that a constitutional petition cannot be used to avoid section 90 of the Employment Act, and that the objections regarding the suit being time barred cannot be cured through a constitutional petition.
Legal principles established
#- Section 90 of the Employment Act prescribes a three-year limitation period for employment claims with no scope for enlargement, and a limitation bar cannot be defeated by invoking alleged constitutional violations
- Limitation periods are not concerned with the merits of a claim
Court orders
#- 1.The preliminary objection dated March 23, 2023 is merited and is granted
- 2.The claim is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction
- 3.Each party will meet their costs of the preliminary objection
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Article 162(2) of the Constitution and section 12 of the Employment and Labour Relations Court Act
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Yamba v Kenya Revenue Authority (Cause E097 of 2021) [2023] KEELRC 1486 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2023). Not stated in the judgment text provided. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2023/1486/eng@2023-06-16
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.