Makori v Public Service Commission & another (Petition 98 of 2018) [2025] KEELRC 1624 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A dismissed public officer lost his pension claim because Kenyan courts cannot apply today's laws to events that happened before those laws existed.
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 Petitioner merits the orders sought
Key legal issues
#Whether the Petitioner is entitled to pension and terminal benefits despite dismissal from service
The petition fails because the applicable law at the time of dismissal expressly excluded dismissed officers from pension benefits, and the 2010 Constitution and Employment Act, 2007 cannot apply retrospectively
Section 5(1) of the Pensions Act (Cap 189) denies any officer an absolute right to pension, and Regulation 29 of the repealed Public Service Commission Regulations, 1985 provided that a dismissed officer forfeits all pension rights. The petition was premised on the Constitution of Kenya, 2010 and the Employment Act, 2007, which were not in force when the cause of action accrued in 2000, and statutes are presumptively prospective unless expressly retrospective.
Legal principles established
#- Except where expressly provided, neither legislation nor constitutional provisions applies retrospectively
- Under the pre-2010 pension regime, a public officer dismissed from service forfeited all rights or claims to pension or gratuity
Court orders
#- 1.The petition is dismissed with no orders on costs
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Articles 23(1), 27, 28, 41(1), 47 and 57 of the Constitution of Kenya as invoked in the petition
Relief refused
#Declarations that refusal to compute and pay terminal benefits and pension was illegal and unconstitutional
Petition based on the Constitution of Kenya, 2010 and the Employment Act, 2007, neither of which was in force when the cause of action accrued; legislation does not apply retrospectively
Damages for malicious prosecution and unlawful confinement
The petition as a whole found to lack merit and dismissed
Costs
Dismissed with no orders on costs - each party to bear own costs
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.
In the end, I find and hold that the petition herein, lacks merit and is for dismissal. It is hereby dismissed with no orders on costs.
No oficer shall have an absolute right to compensation for past services or to pension. gratuity or other allowance; nor shall anything in this Act afiect the right of the Government to dismiss any oficer at any time and without compensation.
except where it is expressly provided, neither legislation nor Constitutional provisions applies retrospectively
Issues in the judgment
#First respondent inconsistently described as functus officio ('functus oficio'/'fundus oficio') and as mis-joined/wrongly sued; judgment does not resolve this issue expressly
Judgment dated and signed 2025 yet the grounds of opposition are described as dated 10th April, 2025 against a 2018 petition, with no explanation of the long delay
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Makori v Public Service Commission & another (Petition 98 of 2018) [2025] KEELRC 1624 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Petition dated 24th September, 2018. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/1624/eng@2025-05-29
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.