Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCDismissedClaim filed on 3rd August 2018 (ELRC), Nairobi· [2024] KEELRC 1220 (KLR)

Nyaga v Barclays Bank (Cause 1455 of 2018) [2024] KEELRC 1220 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
25 January 2024
NMNzioki wa Makau
4,389 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~18 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Employment Court dismissed a bank worker's breach-of-contract claim because she filed it about two years after the three-year legal deadline expired.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Claimant, employed by the Respondent bank as a Clerk from 1994 until her exit through a Voluntary Exit Scheme on 21st July 2017, claimed that a Letter of Offer dated 13th August 2013 appointing her BBR Credit Manager B5, which she accepted and executed, was never implemented. She sought a declaration that the failure to implement the contract was unlawful, unpaid salary increments, pension, bonus, send-off package, leave days, club membership, damages for breach and for discrimination, interest and costs, quantifying the pecuniary claims at several millions of shillings. The Respondent denied that she was successful for the position, averring that an internal reorganisation retitled and enhanced the role to Assistant Credit Manager, for which a separate offer was made and accepted, and that the Credit Manager letter was issued in error, promptly explained and formally withdrawn by letter dated 25th October 2013. It further pleaded mistake, limitation and abuse of process given the pending cause Nazarene Nyaga v Barclays Bank of Kenya Ltd. The parties filed competing submissions on whether the letter of offer was vitiated by mistake, whether the claim was time-barred, and entitlement to reliefs. The Court found that the claim hinged on the unimplemented contract of 13th August 2013, so under section 90 of the Employment Act limitation expired on 12th August 2016, whereas the suit was filed on 3rd August 2018, roughly two years out of time. Since section 90 admits no extension of time, the Court declined to determine the merits as academic and dismissed the claim with costs to the Respondent.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the claim was time-barred under section 90 of the Employment Act

Holding

Yes. The cause of action accrued on 13th August 2013 when the unimplemented contract was executed, and limitation expired on 12th August 2016; the suit filed on 3rd August 2018 was about two years out of time.

Reasoning

Section 90 requires claims arising out of the Employment Act or a contract of service to be commenced within three years of the act, neglect or default complained of, or within twelve months of cessation of a continuing injury. The claim hinged on the unimplemented contract of 13th August 2013, so time began to run then, not upon the Voluntary Exit in 2017. The provision admits no extension of time; the suit was therefore incompetent and had to be dismissed without venturing into the merits.

p. 8

Legal principles established

#
  • An employment claim founded on a contract of service must be filed within three years of the act, neglect or default complained of, and section 90 of the Employment Act does not contemplate extension of time.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The claim being incompetent to the extent of limitation is dismissed with costs to the Respondent

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Employment Actsection 90
  • Limitation of Actions Actsection 4(1)
  • Employment Actsection 10(5)

Cases cited (12)

  • Richard Ng'ang'a Wairutu v Standard Chartered Bank Kenya Limited
    [2017] eKLR
  • Samuel Chacha Mwita v Kenya Medical Research Institute
    [2015] eKLR
  • Edwin Onyono & another v Judicial Service Commission
    [2019] eKLR
  • Tropical Food Products International Limited v Eastern And Southern African Trade And Development Bank (The PTA Bank)
    [2007] eKLR
  • Meshack Otieno Kachuodho v Commissioner General – Kenya Revenue Authority
    [2019] eKLR
  • David Wanjau Muhoro v Ol Pejeta Ranching Limited
    [2014] eKLR
  • Elizabeth Wakanyi Kibe v Telkom Kenya Limited
    [2014] eKLR
  • Douglas Odhiambo Apel & another v Telkom Kenya Limited
    CA 115 of 2006 [2014] eKLR
  • Inter Security Servises Ltd v Mwaniki Associates Ltd
    [2015] eKLR
  • Stephen K Kachila v Bamburi Cement Limited
    [2015] eKLR
  • Solle v Butcher
    [1949] 2 All ER 1107
  • Hassanali Holdings v Citizen Corporation Limited
    HCCC No. 35 of 1995
Jurisdiction invoked
Employment and Labour Relations Court jurisdiction over employment claims; section 90 of the Employment Act on limitation

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Nyaga v Barclays Bank (Cause 1455 of 2018) [2024] KEELRC 1220 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2024). Claim filed on 3rd August 2018 (ELRC), Nairobi. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2024/1220/eng@2024-01-25

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