[2012] KEHC 5454 (KLR)

[2012] KEHC 5454 (KLR)

The court found that although negotiations took place and an offer to settle at Kshs.22 million was made, there was no consensus ad idem (meeting of the minds) between all parties. The 1st plaintiff accepted the offer, but the 2nd plaintiff expressly rejected it. The defendant's own advocates acknowledged in correspondence that consensus had not been achieved and proposed further discussions. The payment of Kshs.22 million was not accepted by both plaintiffs as full and final settlement, and thus the requirements for accord and satisfaction were not met. The judgment was in favour of both plaintiffs jointly and could not be severed. Therefore, there was no binding agreement to settle the...

Citation
[2012] KEHC 5454 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Galeb Gulam (Suing as the executor of the estate of Sadrudin Shashudin Esmail Nuran); Plaintiff: Eldomart Holdings Limited; Defendant: Cyrus Shakhalaga Kwah Jirongo
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
28 September 2012
Case Number
Civil Case 393 of 2003
Procedural Posture
Civil Case / Ruling on Notice of Motion to Confirm Settlement
Outcome
Defendant's application dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Accord and Satisfaction, Consent Judgment, Settlement Negotiations, Execution of Decree
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Accord and Satisfaction Consent Judgment Settlement Negotiations Execution of Decree

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Galeb Gulam (Suing as the executor of the estate of Sadrudin Shashudin Esmail Nuran)

Plaintiff

Eldomart Holdings Limited

Plaintiff

Cyrus Shakhalaga Kwah Jirongo

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Case / Ruling on Notice of Motion to Confirm Settlement

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was a valid accord and satisfaction between the parties for settlement at Kshs.22 million.
  2. 2 Whether the parties reached a binding agreement to settle the judgment debt.
  3. 3 Whether the defendant is entitled to confirmation of settlement by the court.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that although negotiations took place and an offer to settle at Kshs.22 million was made, there was no consensus ad idem (meeting of the minds) between all parties. The 1st plaintiff accepted the offer, but the 2nd plaintiff expressly rejected it. The defendant's own advocates acknowledged in correspondence that consensus had not been achieved and proposed further discussions. The payment of Kshs.22 million was not accepted by both plaintiffs as full and final settlement, and thus the requirements for accord and satisfaction were not met. The judgment was in favour of both plaintiffs jointly and could not be severed. Therefore, there was no binding agreement to settle the...

Court Disposition

Defendant's application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Prayer 4 of the Defendant's application dated 6th January, 2012 is dismissed with costs.