[2025] KECPT 269 (KLR)
The Tribunal found that the claimant failed to provide any documentary evidence to prove her membership in the respondent Sacco or to substantiate the claimed amount of Kshs 460,082. Despite being directed to file supporting documents, including statements of account, the claimant did not comply. The Tribunal...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2025] KECPT 269 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Emma Nasesia Kiduuli; Respondent: Metropolitan National Sacco Limited
- Court
- Cooperative Tribunal
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Tribunal Case 539/E682 of 2023
- Procedural Posture
- Refund Claim / Judgment
- Outcome
- claim dismissed
- Judges
- BM Kimemia, Janet Mwatsama, B Sawe, F Lotuiya, P. Gichuki, M Chesikaw
- Legal Topics
- Sacco Refunds, Burden of Proof, Membership Verification
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Emma Nasesia Kiduuli
Applicant
Metropolitan National Sacco Limited
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Refund Claim / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the claimant was a member of the respondent Sacco.
- 2 Whether the claimant is entitled to a refund of Kshs 460,082 from the respondent.
- 3 Whether the claimant has provided sufficient evidence to support her claim.
Ratio Decidendi
The Tribunal found that the claimant failed to provide any documentary evidence to prove her membership in the respondent Sacco or to substantiate the claimed amount of Kshs 460,082. Despite being directed to file supporting documents, including statements of account, the claimant did not comply. The Tribunal emphasized that the burden of proof lies with the claimant, and without evidence, the claim could not be authenticated or granted. The absence of a challenge from the respondent did not relieve the claimant of her evidentiary obligations. Consequently, the claim was dismissed for lack of merit.
Court Disposition
claim dismissed
Orders
- The claim is dismissed for lack of merit.
- There shall be no order as to costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
32 paragraphs
Kiduuli v Metropolitan National Sacco Limited (Tribunal Case 539/E682 of 2023) [2025] KECPT 269 (KLR) (29 April 2025) (Judgment)
Neutral citation: [2025] KECPT 269 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Cooperative Tribunal
Tribunal Case 539/E682 of 2023
BM Kimemia, Chair, Janet Mwatsama, Vice Chair, B Sawe, F Lotuiya, P. Gichuki & M Chesikaw, Members
April 29, 2025
Between
Emma Nasesia Kiduuli
Claimant
and
Metropolitan National Sacco Limited
Respondent
Judgment
1. The claim is instituted through a Statement of Claim dated 1. 12. 2022. In the claim, the Claimant alleges that the Respondent owes her Kshs 460,082/= by way of savings.
2. She has filed a notice dated 28. 4.2022 informing the Respondent of her Notice of Resignation from the Respondent.
3. Being a matter for refunds the Tribunal on 12. 6.2024 directed that the matter be canvassed through written submissions. By the time of writing this judgment this Tribunal had not received any documents including the written submissions from the Respondent.
4. The issue for determination is whether the Claimant was a member of the Respondent and that she is entitled to the Kshs 460,082/= claim from the Respondent.
5. The Claimant has filed a written submission on 20. 6.2024 as directed by the Tribunal.
6. The Claimant has also filed documents vide bundle of documents dated 1. 12. 2022. The documents filed are Notices Withdrawal dated 17. 12. 2021 and 28. 4.2022 and he advocates ‘ demand letter to the Respondent dated 6. 10. 2022.
Analysis 7. We observe that the claim figure of Kshs 460,082/= as per the Statement of Claim is not evidenced at all.
8. Despite this Tribunal directing on 12. 6.2024 that parties were to file documents to be used in the trial, including Statements of Accounts, none has been filed at the time of writing this judgment.
9. The Claimant has not made any effort to prove that she is a member of the Respondent
10. Equally she has not proved beyond reasonable doubt that she is owed the claim amount as per the Statement of Claim.
11. The Kshs 460,082/= claim is not supported at all. As per the evidence at Section 107 (i), those who allege must prove.
12. While this Tribunal is not a court of technicalities, we must be vigilant to ensure that claims for refunds are at least supported by a payslip and/or Statement of Account of the Claimant
13. These two documents will assist the Tribunal to establish how much of the claim is deposits and how much is share capital where the parties have not given a breakdown.
14. In this case, the claim figure has not been authenticated despite not being challenged by the Defence.
Conclusion 15. This Tribunal sympathizes with the claimant ideally a Claimant in a refund case should be a straight forward case once the claim amounts is evidenced and broken down where necessary.
16. In this case the Claimant has not demonstrated that she was indeed a member of the Respondent neither has the claim amount of Kshs 460,082/= been supported by any document.
17. Due to the aforesaid shortcomings in the Claimant’s case, this tribunal is inclined to find that the claim lacks merit and therefore dismisses the claim with no orders to costs.
JUDGMENT SIGNED, DATED AND DELIVERED VIRTUALLY AT NAIROBI THIS 29TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025. HON. B. KIMEMIA - CHAIRPERSON SIGNED 29. 4.2025HON. J. MWATSAMA - DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON SIGNED 29. 4.2025HON. BEATRICE SAWE - MEMBER SIGNED 29. 4.2025HON. FRIDAH LOTUIYA - MEMBER SIGNED 29. 4.2025HON. PHILIP GICHUKI - MEMBER SIGNED 29. 4.2025HON. MICHAEL CHESIKAW - MEMBER SIGNED 29. 4.2025Tribunal Clerk JemimahMs. Njeri advocate holding brief for Kanyoro advocate for Claimant.No appearance for Respondent