[2003] KEHC 342 (KLR)

[2003] KEHC 342 (KLR)

The court held that once Kenya Women Finance Trust approved and disbursed the loan to the women group, it ceased to be the owner of the money. The Trust's only remaining interest was in the repayment of the loan, not in the ownership of the funds. Therefore, it lacked locus standi to file a criminal complaint for...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2003] KEHC 342 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Jemimah Wangui Kihara; Respondent: Republic
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
? 444 of ??
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
appeal allowed; conviction quashed; sentence set aside
Legal Topics
Theft by Servant, Ownership of Property, Locus Standi, Criminal Liability, Employee Misconduct
Source Language
en
Criminal Law Theft by Servant Ownership of Property Locus Standi Criminal Liability Employee Misconduct

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

Parties

Jemimah Wangui Kihara

Appellant

Republic

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the appellant, as an employee, stole Kshs. 600,000 from Kenya Women Finance Trust.
  2. 2 Whether Kenya Women Finance Trust had locus standi to file a criminal complaint after disbursing the loan to the women group.
  3. 3 Whether breach of internal rules by the appellant constituted a criminal offence.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that once Kenya Women Finance Trust approved and disbursed the loan to the women group, it ceased to be the owner of the money. The Trust's only remaining interest was in the repayment of the loan, not in the ownership of the funds. Therefore, it lacked locus standi to file a criminal complaint for theft of the money. Furthermore, any breach of internal rules by the appellant did not amount to a criminal offence, as such rules were not in force at the time of the transaction and, in any event, were not criminalized. The existence of a civil suit by the Trust against the women group further confirmed the civil, rather than criminal, nature of the dispute. Consequently, the...

Court Disposition

appeal allowed; conviction quashed; sentence set aside

Orders

  • The appeal is allowed.
  • The conviction is quashed.