Maganda v Kenya Methodist University (Employment and Labour Relations Cause E1342 of 2018) [2024] KEELRC 2277 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Employment Court struck out a Kshs 270,000 unpaid fees claim because it was filed more than three years after the employment ended.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether the Claim is time barred under section 90 of the Employment Act and should therefore be struck out
Key legal issues
#Whether the claim filed on 29th August 2018 for fees for services rendered between January and April 2016 was time barred
The claim was time barred under section 90 of the Employment Act and was struck out
Section 90 of the Employment Act requires that employment claims be commenced within three years of the act, neglect or default complained of. The court found that the cause of action accrues upon cessation of the employment contract, which ended in April 2016. Filing on 29th August 2018 was beyond the three-year period, so the preliminary objection was justified and the claim was struck out with costs.
Legal principles established
#- Under section 90 of the Employment Act, the limitation period in employment claims runs from the cessation of the contract of service
Court orders
#- 1.The suit is struck out for being statute barred
- 2.Costs of the suit awarded to the Respondent
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Employment Act, section 90; Limitation of Actions Act (Cap. 22)
Relief refused
#Claimant's claim for unpaid fees of Kshs. 270,000/- for services delivered between January and April 2016
The claim was filed outside the three-year limitation period under section 90 of the Employment Act, the cause of action having accrued upon cessation of employment in April 2016
Costs
The suit was struck out with costs to the Respondent
Quotable passages
#Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.
A Preliminary Objection is in the nature of what used to be a demurrer. It raises a pure point of law which is argued on the assumption that all the facts pleaded by the other side are correct.
In this case the employer-employee relationship which ended in April 2016.
In conclusion, the suit is hereby struck out with costs for being statute barred.
Issues in the judgment
#The judgment does not state the case number, parties' names or the neutral citation; it opens directly at paragraph 1 with the preliminary objection
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Maganda v Kenya Methodist University (Employment and Labour Relations Cause E1342 of 2018) [2024] KEELRC 2277 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2024). Not stated in the excerpt. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2024/2277/eng@2024-09-25
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.