[2025] KECPT 352 (KLR)

[2025] KECPT 352 (KLR)

The Tribunal found that the claimant, as guarantor, had his deposits lawfully deducted by the Sacco to settle the respondent's defaulted loan. The respondent failed to provide credible evidence of repayment or to substantiate his claim that his employer's failure to remit deducted amounts absolved him of liability. The Tribunal held that the jurisdiction to determine disputes does not extend to the respondent's employer, Bizone Limited, as it is neither a member nor a cooperative society under section 76 of the Co-operative Societies Act. The respondent's attempts to shift blame to third parties were unsupported by evidence and outside the Tribunal's jurisdiction. The Tribunal concluded...

Citation
[2025] KECPT 352 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: James Mamadi; Respondent: Benard Shisanya
Court
Cooperative Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
26 June 2025
Case Number
Tribunal Case 382/E450 of 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Claim / Final Judgment
Outcome
Judgment for the claimant.
Judges
Janet Mwatsama, B Sawe, F Lotuiya, P. Gichuki, M Chesikaw, PO Aol
Legal Topics
Guarantees in Sacco Loans, Loan Default Liability, Third Party Procedure, Cooperative Societies Jurisdiction
Source Language
English
Commercial and Corporate Guarantees in Sacco Loans Loan Default Liability Third Party Procedure Cooperative Societies Jurisdiction

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

Parties

James Mamadi

Applicant

Benard Shisanya

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Claim / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent is liable to refund the claimant Kshs 622,664 recovered by the Sacco from the claimant's deposits as guarantor.
  2. 2 Who should bear the costs of the suit.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that the claimant, as guarantor, had his deposits lawfully deducted by the Sacco to settle the respondent's defaulted loan. The respondent failed to provide credible evidence of repayment or to substantiate his claim that his employer's failure to remit deducted amounts absolved him of liability. The Tribunal held that the jurisdiction to determine disputes does not extend to the respondent's employer, Bizone Limited, as it is neither a member nor a cooperative society under section 76 of the Co-operative Societies Act. The respondent's attempts to shift blame to third parties were unsupported by evidence and outside the Tribunal's jurisdiction. The Tribunal concluded...

Court Disposition

Judgment for the claimant.

Orders

  • The respondent shall refund the claimant Kshs 622,664.
  • The respondent shall pay costs of the suit to the claimant.