[2024] KECPT 1165 (KLR)

[2024] KECPT 1165 (KLR)

The Tribunal found that the Claimant failed to demonstrate any new and important matter or evidence that was not within her knowledge at the time of the original order, nor did she show any mistake or error apparent on the face of the record. The Claimant's assertion of worsened financial status was unsupported by...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2024] KECPT 1165 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Naomi Kathure Githaka; Respondent: Capital Sacco Limited; Respondent: I.G Ringa t/a Viewline Auctioneers
Court
Cooperative Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Tribunal Case 502 of 2020
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Review and Stay of Execution
Outcome
application dismissed
Judges
BM Kimemia, J. Mwatsama, B Sawe, F Lotuiya, P. Gichuki, M Chesikaw, PO Aol
Legal Topics
Review of Orders, Stay of Execution, Loan Default, Installment Payments
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Banking and Finance Review of Orders Stay of Execution Loan Default Installment Payments

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Naomi Kathure Githaka

Applicant

Capital Sacco Limited

Respondent

I.G Ringa t/a Viewline Auctioneers

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Review and Stay of Execution

  1. 1 Whether the Claimant has met the threshold for review of the Tribunal's orders under Order 45 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules.
  2. 2 Whether the Claimant is entitled to a stay of execution and variation of the installment payment terms based on her financial status.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that the Claimant failed to demonstrate any new and important matter or evidence that was not within her knowledge at the time of the original order, nor did she show any mistake or error apparent on the face of the record. The Claimant's assertion of worsened financial status was unsupported by documentary evidence, such as books of account or financial statements. The Tribunal held that a party's financial situation, without specific evidence, does not meet the threshold for review under Order 45 Rule 1. The application was therefore dismissed for failing to satisfy the legal requirements for review or variation of the Tribunal's previous orders.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The Notice of Motion Application dated 14th August, 2023 and filed on 25th August, 2023 is dismissed.
  • The Claimant shall bear the costs of the application.