[2022] KECPT 158 (KLR)

[2022] KECPT 158 (KLR)

The Tribunal found that the Claimant was a member of the Respondent Sacco and had made monthly contributions. The Respondent did not deny owing the Claimant but disputed the amount, asserting that share capital is nonrefundable. The Tribunal noted that the Respondent failed to produce the by-laws to support the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2022] KECPT 158 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Sylvia Naiputa John; Respondent: Metropolitan National Sacco Society Limited
Court
Cooperative Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Tribunal Case 298 of 2020
Procedural Posture
Tribunal Claim / Judgment
Outcome
judgment for the claimant
Judges
M Mwatsama, P. Gichuki, B. Akusala
Legal Topics
Sacco Member Refunds, Share Capital Nonrefundability, Dividend Entitlement
Source Language
en
Commercial and Corporate Sacco Member Refunds Share Capital Nonrefundability Dividend Entitlement

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 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sylvia Naiputa John

Applicant

Metropolitan National Sacco Society Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Tribunal Claim / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the Claimant is entitled to a refund of her shares and dividends from the Respondent Sacco upon withdrawal of membership.
  2. 2 Whether the amount claimed by the Claimant is accurate or if the Respondent's computation is correct.
  3. 3 Whether the share capital is refundable under the Sacco's by-laws.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that the Claimant was a member of the Respondent Sacco and had made monthly contributions. The Respondent did not deny owing the Claimant but disputed the amount, asserting that share capital is nonrefundable. The Tribunal noted that the Respondent failed to produce the by-laws to support the nonrefundability of share capital but accepted the general principle that share capital is not refundable. The Tribunal also observed that the Respondent had scheduled the Claimant's refund for a date that had already passed. Considering the pleadings, witness statements, and documents, the Tribunal entered judgment in favour of the Claimant for Kshs. 374,000 plus costs and...

Court Disposition

judgment for the claimant

Orders

  • Judgment entered in favour of the Claimant against the Respondent for Kshs. 374,000 plus costs and interest from the date of filing suit.
  • 30 days stay of execution granted.