Kenyan case law
-
Isiolo Teachers Sacco Society Limited v Abdi (Tribunal Case 409 of 2019) [2022] KECPT 898 (KLR) (Civ) (15 December 2022) (Ruling)
✦ The notice of motion application is allowed, and the claimant is awarded Kshs 1,086,884/80 plus costs and interest.
-
Isiolo Teachers Sacco Society Limited v Jarso (Tribunal Case 410 of 2019) [2022] KECPT 911 (KLR) (Civ) (15 December 2022) (Ruling)
✦ The Notice of Motion application is allowed, and the Surcharge Order is upheld with costs.
-
Isiolo Teachers Sacco Society Limited v Ngaruthi (Tribunal Case 412 of 2019) [2022] KECPT 900 (KLR) (15 December 2022) (Ruling)
✦ The notice of motion application is allowed, and the claimant is awarded Kshs 1,438,884/80 plus costs and interest.
-
Isiolo Teachers Sacco Society Limited v Galgalo (Tribunal Case 408 of 2019) [2022] KECPT 910 (KLR) (Civ) (15 December 2022) (Ruling)
✦ The Surcharge Order is enforced, and the respondent is ordered to pay Kshs. 1,086,884/80 plus costs and interest.
-
Isiolo Teachers Sacco Society Limited v Matoye (Tribunal Case 405 of 2019) [2022] KECPT 909 (KLR) (15 December 2022) (Ruling)
✦ The notice to surcharge was properly served, and the Surcharge Order is upheld. The motion application is allowed with costs.
-
Mwambi v Mwalimu National Credit and Savings Society Ltd (Tribunal Case 83/ E173 of 2022) [2022] KECPT 897 (KLR) (Civ) (15 December 2022) (Ruling)
✦ The Annual General Meeting and elections held on February 5, 2022, at the Nairobi branch are declared null and void in the main claim.
-
Isiolo Teachers Sacco Society Limited v Boru (Tribunal Case 414 of 2019) [2022] KECPT 913 (KLR) (Civ) (15 December 2022) (Ruling)
✦ The Notice of Motion application is allowed, and the Surcharge Order is enforced.
-
Isiolo Teachers Sacco Society Limited v Osiko (Tribunal Case 413 of 2019) [2022] KECPT 912 (KLR) (15 December 2022) (Ruling)
✦ The notice of motion application is allowed, and the claimant is awarded Kshs 1,286,884/80 plus costs and interest.
-
Gitonga v Urithi Housing Co-operative Society Limited (Tribunal Case 477 of 2019) [2022] KECPT 892 (KLR) (Civ) (8 December 2022) (Judgment)
✦ We find in favour of the Claimant against the Respondent for Ksh 3,339,840.00 plus cost and interest from the date of filing the suit.
-
Waithira v Urithi Housing Co-op Society Limited (Tribunal Case 448 of 2020) [2022] KECPT 903 (KLR) (7 December 2022) (Judgment)
✦ Judgment is entered in favor of the Claimant for the refund of Ksh. 1,000,000.00 and bank loan interest.
-
Keiyo Housing Cooperative Society Limited v Chemagut & 8 others (Tribunal Case E017/426 of 2022) [2022] KECPT 901 (KLR) (Civ) (7 December 2022) (Ruling)
✦ The parties are ordered to appeal to the Commissioner for Cooperatives Development for mediation.
-
Murambi & 3 others v Kariuki (Tribunal Case 183 of 2021) [2022] KECPT 894 (KLR) (Civ) (22 September 2022) (Judgment)
✦ The court finds in favor of the claimants for the amounts of Ksh 405,739, Ksh 58,913, Ksh 558,940, and Ksh 278,525, respectively. The prayer for the loan amount is dismissed.
-
Kiboro v Unaitas Sacco Society Limited (Tribunal Case 150 of 2018) [2022] KECPT 1079 (KLR) (31 August 2022) (Ruling)
✦ Allow costs itemized as number 1 on instructions, drawing and filing of the suit to the extend of Kshs. 35,280/= as provided under schedule II paragraph 8 on the Advocates Remuneration Order 2014. Disallow costs from 2-11 and 12-23. Allow disbursements from 25-34 subject to production of receipts/vouchers.
-
Ndichu v Banana Hill Matatu Sacco Society Limited (Tribunal Case 613 of 2018) [2022] KECPT 215 (KLR) (Civ) (26 May 2022) (Judgment)
✦ The tribunal finds in favor of the claimant for Kshs 31,421/= plus costs and interests.
-
Gicheru v Banana Hill Matatu Sacco Society Limited (Tribunal Case 612 of 2018) [2022] KECPT 213 (KLR) (Civ) (26 May 2022) (Judgment)
✦ The Tribunal finds in favor of the Claimant for Kshs. 325,467/= plus costs and interests.
-
Kimani v Banana Hill Matatu Sacco Society Limited (Tribunal Case 614 of 2018) [2022] KECPT 214 (KLR) (Civ) (26 May 2022) (Judgment)
✦ Judgment in favor of claimant for Kshs. 78,331/= plus costs and interests.
-
Mwangi v Bids Sacco Society Ltd (Tribunal Case 213 of 2015) [2022] KECPT 159 (KLR) (26 May 2022) (Bill of Costs)
✦ The bill of costs is taxed at Ksh. 41,390/-
-
Njuguna v Banana Hill Matatu Sacco Society Limited (Tribunal Case 610 of 2018) [2022] KECPT 239 (KLR) (26 May 2022) (Judgment)
✦ We find in favor of the claimant for Kshs 180,005/= plus costs and interest in the suit.
-
PCEA Kandara Parish Sacco Society Limited v Mwaura (Tribunal Case 545 of 2017) [2022] KECPT 209 (KLR) (Civ) (26 May 2022) (Ruling)
✦ The respondent's application is dismissed with costs
-
Kimaru v Commissioner for Co-operative Development & another (Tribunal Appeal 33 of 2019) [2022] KECPT 210 (KLR) (Civ) (26 May 2022) (Judgment)
✦ The appeal is dismissed. The Commissioner's decision is upheld.
-
Mwangi v Banana Hill Matatu Sacco Society Limited (Tribunal Case 611 of 2018) [2022] KECPT 212 (KLR) (Civ) (26 May 2022) (Judgment)
✦ Claimant is found in favor for Kshs 325,467/= plus costs and interests
-
Karanja v Banana Hill Matatu Sacco Society Limited (Tribunal Case 615 of 2018) [2022] KECPT 216 (KLR) (Civ) (26 May 2022) (Judgment)
✦ The Tribunal finds in favor of the Claimant for Kshs. 811,640/- plus costs and interests, and dismisses the prayer for dividends.
-
PCEA Kandara Parish Sacco Society Limited v Rubia (Tribunal Case 546 of 2017) [2022] KECPT 168 (KLR) (Civ) (26 May 2022) (Ruling)
✦ The application is dismissed with costs to the claimant/respondent
-
Cooperative Society Limited v Ruto (Tribunal Case 110 of 2021) [2022] KECPT 153 (KLR) (Civ) (26 May 2022) (Judgment)
✦ The Tribunal has no jurisdiction to hear the claim as it pertains to the respondent's role as an employee, not a member.
-
Mugambi v H & M Cooperative Savings & Credit Society Limited & 4 others (Tribunal Case 287 of 2021) [2022] KECPT 166 (KLR) (Civ) (10 May 2022) (Ruling)
✦ The tribunal finds that the court orders and directions issued by the tribunal on April 5, 2022, were binding and should be adhered to. The respondents' application for adjournment is denied.