[2005] KEHC 3186 (KLR)

[2005] KEHC 3186 (KLR)

The court found that the plaintiff had provided his properties as security for a loan to the first defendant under an agreement that stipulated the conditions for release of the securities. The first defendant breached the agreement by terminating the plaintiff's employment and varying shareholding without his...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2005] KEHC 3186 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Joseph Mathenge Kanyoro; Defendant: Wakarwa Printers Limited; Defendant: Kenya Industrial Estates
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
4 February 2005
Case Number
Civil Suit 3052 of 1986
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Judgment
Outcome
Judgment for the plaintiff against both defendants.
Legal Topics
Guarantee Liability, Variation of Contract, Discharge of Surety, Mortgage and Charge, Enforcement of Court Orders, Company Director Liability
Source Language
english
Land and Property Commercial and Corporate Civil Procedure Guarantee Liability Variation of Contract Discharge of Surety Mortgage and Charge Enforcement of Court Orders +1 more

Source-derived case record

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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Joseph Mathenge Kanyoro

Plaintiff

Wakarwa Printers Limited

Defendant

Kenya Industrial Estates

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Suit / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to discharge of the charged properties following termination of his services and withdrawal as guarantor.
  2. 2 Whether the variation of the loan agreement between the first and second defendants without the plaintiff's consent discharged the plaintiff from liability as guarantor.
  3. 3 Whether the defendants were in contempt of court by failing to implement the consent order for discharge of the plaintiff's property.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiff had provided his properties as security for a loan to the first defendant under an agreement that stipulated the conditions for release of the securities. The first defendant breached the agreement by terminating the plaintiff's employment and varying shareholding without his consent. The second defendant, as lender, varied the terms of the loan and accepted new securities and shareholders without informing or obtaining the consent of the plaintiff as guarantor. The court held that these actions constituted a material variation of the contract, which, under established legal principles, discharged the plaintiff from liability as guarantor. The court...

Court Disposition

Judgment for the plaintiff against both defendants.

Orders

  • The charged property L.R. No. KARIA/THEGENGE/791 to be discharged and title delivered to the plaintiff within 21 days.
  • The charged property L.R. No. 209/7388/70 declared discharged and title to be restored to the plaintiff within 30 days.