[2016] KEELC 628 (KLR)

[2016] KEELC 628 (KLR)

The court found that the plaintiff, as guarantor, had executed a guarantee for a financial facility granted to the 3rd defendant and charged her property to the 1st defendant. The 3rd defendant defaulted, and the plaintiff admitted the outstanding debt and agreed to liquidate it by consent. The court held that, in...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2016] KEELC 628 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Elizabeth Jerono Yator; Defendant: Consolidated Bank (K) Limited; Defendant: Protus Wanga T/A Timeless Dolphin Auctioneers; Defendant: Lomson Enterprises Limited
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Eldoret
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 17 of 2015
Procedural Posture
Environment and Land Case / Ruling on Costs After Compromise of Suit
Outcome
Costs awarded to the 1st defendant.
Judges
A Ombwayo
Legal Topics
Guarantee Liability, Charge of Land, Award of Costs, Loan Default
Source Language
en
Land and Property Banking and Finance Guarantee Liability Charge of Land Award of Costs Loan Default

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Elizabeth Jerono Yator

Plaintiff

Consolidated Bank (K) Limited

Defendant

Protus Wanga T/A Timeless Dolphin Auctioneers

Defendant

Lomson Enterprises Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Environment and Land Case / Ruling on Costs After Compromise of Suit

  1. 1 Who is the successful party entitled to costs after compromise of a suit involving a charged property and guarantee liability.
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff, as guarantor, should bear the costs after admitting liability and agreeing to liquidate the debt.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiff, as guarantor, had executed a guarantee for a financial facility granted to the 3rd defendant and charged her property to the 1st defendant. The 3rd defendant defaulted, and the plaintiff admitted the outstanding debt and agreed to liquidate it by consent. The court held that, in these circumstances, the 1st defendant was the successful party as the plaintiff's claim was not granted and she admitted liability. Exercising its discretion, the court awarded costs to the 1st defendant, reasoning that the plaintiff should bear the costs for having to settle the guarantee after the 3rd defendant's default.

Court Disposition

Costs awarded to the 1st defendant.

Orders

  • The plaintiff shall pay the costs of the suit to the 1st defendant.