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

Pyrethrum Board of Kenya v Buda Cake And Feeds Ltd [2016] KEHC 7033 (KLR)

[2016] KEHC 7033 (KLR) High Court of Kenya
Read PDF
Court
High Court of Kenya
Case number
7033
Citation
[2016] KEHC 7033 (KLR)
Decided
9 February 2016
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeCivil AppealPostureCross-appeal from a judgment of the trial courtCoramJANET MULWA
Holding

The cross-appeal is successful, and the trial court's judgment is varied. The appellant is ordered to pay the respondent Kshs.197,000 for loss of profit, which shall attract interest at court rates from the date of the trial court's judgment until payment in full. The sum of Kshs.394,000 payable to the respondent shall attract interest at court rates from the 9th March 2005 until payment in full.

Facts

The respondent filed a counter-appeal against the trial court's judgment, claiming loss of profits and general damages for breach of contract. The trial court awarded the respondent Kshs.197,000 for loss of profit and Kshs.394,000 for unsupplied bags, but did not award interest.

Issues

  1. Whether the trial court erred in assessing loss of profits only on 1970 bags instead of 5900 bags
  2. Whether the trial court erred in ordering interest to be paid from the date of judgment

Reasoning

The court found that the trial court erred in not awarding interest on the sum of Kshs.197,000 for loss of profit and in not awarding interest on the sum of Kshs.394,000 for unsupplied bags.

Outcome

Cross-appeal successful

Orders

  • Appellant to pay respondent Kshs.197,000 for loss of profit with interest from the date of the trial court's judgment until payment in full
  • Appellant to pay respondent Kshs.394,000 for unsupplied bags with interest from the 9th March 2005 until payment in full
  • Costs of the cross-appeal to be paid by the appellant

Remedies

  • Interest on Kshs.197,000 for loss of profit
  • Interest on Kshs.394,000 for unsupplied bags
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