Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCDismissedNot stated in the judgment

Mpaayei v CMC Motors Group Limited (Cause E482 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 140 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
30 January 2025
RSRadido Stephen
1,031 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~4 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

The Employment Court confirmed it cannot extend the three-year deadline for filing employment contract claims in Kenya, so late claims are dead on arrival.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
Kenneth Mpaayei sued CMC Motors Group Ltd alleging unfair termination of employment, claiming he was summarily dismissed on 10 March 2021. He filed a Motion on 29 November 2024 seeking leave to file suit out of time or enlargement of time, and that his Statement of Claim (filed 26 June 2024) be deemed duly filed. He attributed the delay to health challenges and financial incapacity. The Respondent filed Grounds of Opposition contending that section 12 of the Employment and Labour Relations Act does not provide for enlargement of time, that section 27 of the Limitation of Actions Act does not confer such jurisdiction for contract claims, and that section 90 of the Employment Act caps employment claims at three years with no extension power, relying on Rift Valley Railways v Musonye. The Court held that under section 90 the claim should have been filed on or before 20 March 2024, and the Statement of Claim fell outside that window. Relying on Divecon v Samani and Rift Valley Railways, both Court of Appeal decisions which the Court treated as binding, it held there are no exceptions to the three-year limitation period save continuing injury, which was not established, and that no court may entertain a contract claim or an application to extend time filed outside the statutory period. The Court concluded it had no jurisdiction to grant the orders sought and that the Motion and Cause could not survive. The Motion and Statement of Claim were dismissed with costs.

Questions the Court framed

#

The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.

  1. 1.Whether the Court has power or jurisdiction to grant leave to file, or enlarge time for filing, an employment/contractual claim outside the three-year limitation period prescribed by section 90 of the Employment Act

Key legal issues

#
01

Jurisdiction to enlarge time for filing an employment claim outside section 90 of the Employment Act

Holding

The Court has no power or jurisdiction to grant leave to file or extend time for a contractual employment claim filed outside the three-year limitation period; the only exception is continuing injury, absent here.

Reasoning

Section 90 of the Employment Act caps claims for breach of employment contract at three years from accrual. The Court of Appeal in Divecon v Samani and Rift Valley Railways v Musonye held that no court may entertain an action, or an application to extend time, for a contract claim brought outside the statutory period, as Part III of the Limitation of Actions Act does not apply to contract actions. These authorities are binding. The dismissal occurred on 10 March 2021 and the claim was filed after 20 March 2024, outside the window, and not a continuing injury case.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • Where a statute prescribes a limitation period for bringing a contractual (employment) action, no court has power to extend that time in the absence of statutory provision allowing extension.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The Motion filed on 29 November 2024 and the Statement of Claim filed on 26 June 2024 are declared without merit and do not lie
  2. 2.The Motion and Statement of Claim are dismissed with costs

The bench

#

One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.

RS
majority

Wrote the judgment

Jurisdiction invoked
Employment and Labour Relations Act cap 8E, section 12 (as invoked by the Claimant)

Relief refused

#

Leave to file suit out of time and/or enlargement of time to file the Statement of Claim

The Court lacks jurisdiction to extend the three-year statutory limitation period under section 90 of the Employment Act for contractual employment claims; binding Court of Appeal authority forecloses such extension

p. 2

Deeming the Statement of Claim duly filed

The claim was filed outside the prescribed three-year window and could not be deemed duly filed without jurisdiction to enlarge time

p. 3

Costs

The Motion and Statement of Claim are dismissed with costs (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.

This Court has no power or jurisdiction to do what the Claimant is asking it to do. To compound the situation, the Claimant filed a Statement of Claim well outside time without any directions or leave from the Court.
p. 3Absence of jurisdiction to enlarge time for filing employment claims
The Motion filed on 29 November 2024, and the Statement of Claim filed on 26 June 2024 are without merit and do not lie.
p. 3Final orders - dismissal of Motion and Statement of Claim
The Motion and Statement of Claim are dismissed with costs.
p. 3Final orders and costs

Issues in the judgment

#
minor

Divecon v Samani quotation includes a passage that appears to be a submission rather than part of the Court of Appeal's holding

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Mpaayei v CMC Motors Group Limited (Cause E482 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 140 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/140/eng@2025-01-30

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