SheriaNet for Android — search and read Kenyan case law from your phone, offline.
Join the beta →

Charles Mwangi Kirigwi & another v Unaitas Sacco Society Limited & another [2020] KECPT 3 (KLR)

[2020] KECPT 3 (KLR) Co-operative Tribunal
Read PDF
Court
Co-operative Tribunal
Case number
3
Citation
[2020] KECPT 3 (KLR)
Decided
3 November 2020
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypePreliminary ObjectionPostureRespondent's Application to strike out the suit and for costs
Holding

The Tribunal has jurisdiction to entertain the claim as against the 2nd Respondent

Facts

The 2nd Respondent (Eliud Chai Wambu/T/A Chador Auctioneers) is an auctioneer and not a member of the 1st Respondent (Unaitas Sacco Society Limited). The 1st Claimant (Charles Mwangi Kirigwi) and 2nd Claimant (Centoil Limited) are suing the 2nd Respondent for failing to repay loans to the 1st Respondent.

Issues

  1. Whether the Tribunal has jurisdiction to entertain the claim as against the 2nd Respondent
  2. Who should meet the costs of the Application

Reasoning

The court held that the 2nd Respondent's role in recovering loans owed to the 1st Respondent constituted the business of the Tribunal within the meaning of Section 76 of the Co-operative Societies Act.

Outcome

The 2nd Respondent's Application to strike out the suit and for costs was dismissed.

Orders

  • The Tribunal's jurisdiction to entertain the claim as against the 2nd Respondent was upheld.

Authorities cited

Legislation (2)
  • Co-operative Societies Act, Cap 490 Laws of Kenya
  • Section 76 of the Co-operative Societies Act
Cases cited (3)
  • Bingwa Sacco Society Limited -vs- Quickline Auctioneers & Another [2017]eKLR
  • Samuel Kamau Macharia & Another –vs- Kenya Commercial Bank Limited & 2 others [2012]eKLR
  • Republic –vs- Chief Magistrates court ex-parte Edward Kibet Kimetto[2013]eKLR
Experimental AI summary generated by a language model, not a lawyer. It may contain errors or omissions and must not be relied on for legal decisions — the full judgment below is the authoritative source.
Full judgment 0.1 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case