[2019] KECPT 54 (KLR)

[2019] KECPT 54 (KLR)

The tribunal found that the statement of defence categorically denied owing the sum claimed by the applicant, and that the alleged admissions were neither plain nor obvious, nor clearly written or implied. The tribunal held that judgment on admission is only appropriate where the admission is clear and unequivocal,...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2019] KECPT 54 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Caleb Ingolo; Respondent: Kibera Matatu Owners Savings & Credit Co-operative Society Ltd
Court
Cooperative Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Tribunal Case 493 of 2017
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Notice of Motion for Judgment on Admission
Outcome
application dismissed
Legal Topics
Judgment on Admission, Application for Summary Judgment, Admissions in Pleadings
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Judgment on Admission Application for Summary Judgment Admissions in Pleadings

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Caleb Ingolo

Applicant

Kibera Matatu Owners Savings & Credit Co-operative Society Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Notice of Motion for Judgment on Admission

  1. 1 Whether the respondent has made a clear and unequivocal admission of owing the sum claimed by the applicant to warrant entry of judgment on admission.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant is entitled to judgment for the admitted sum under Order 13 Rule 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules.
  3. 3 Whether the existence of a guaranteed loan affects the applicant's eligibility for refund of shares.

Ratio Decidendi

The tribunal found that the statement of defence categorically denied owing the sum claimed by the applicant, and that the alleged admissions were neither plain nor obvious, nor clearly written or implied. The tribunal held that judgment on admission is only appropriate where the admission is clear and unequivocal, which was not the case here. The existence of a guaranteed loan further complicated the applicant's eligibility for refund. Consequently, the application for judgment on admission was found to lack merit and was dismissed with costs in the cause.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The application dated 7/12/2018 is dismissed with costs in the cause.
  • Parties to fix the matter for hearing and determination on a priority basis.