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

Felix Otande v Commissioner for Co-Operative Development & another [2021] KECPT 572 (KLR)

[2021] KECPT 572 (KLR) Co-operative Tribunal
Read PDF
Court
Co-operative Tribunal
Case number
572
Citation
[2021] KECPT 572 (KLR)
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeAppealPostureAppeal from a decision of the Commissioner for Co-operative DevelopmentCoramHon. B. Kimemia, Hon. J. Mwatsama, Mr. P. Gichuki
Holding

The Appeal is dismissed. The decision of the Commissioner of Co-operative Development is upheld.

Facts

The Appellant, Felix Otande, is challenging a decision made by the Commissioner for Co-operative Development regarding a Busia County Assembly Sacco. The Appellant claims the Commissioner erred in law and fact in carrying out an inquiry and applying a procedure to an entity not registered under the Co-operative Societies Act.

Issues

  1. Whether the Commissioner erred in law and fact by conducting an inquiry to an entity not registered under the Co-operative Societies Act.
  2. Whether the Commissioner erred in law and fact in reaching a decision and recommendation for a surcharge against the Appellant without proper reconciliation of accounts and related matters.
  3. Whether the Commissioner erred in law and fact in making a decision without affording the Appellant an opportunity to be heard and without looking at the evidence and documents presented.

Reasoning

The Court finds that the Commissioner acted within his legal mandate and that the Appellant did not present any evidence to support his claims.

Outcome

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The decision of the Commissioner of Co-operative Development is upheld.
  • The costs of the appeal are awarded to the Respondent.
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 0.2 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case