[2025] KECPT 356 (KLR)

[2025] KECPT 356 (KLR)

The Tribunal found that the Claimant had established, through undisputed documentary evidence, that he had savings of Kshs.176,000 with the Respondent Sacco. The Respondent failed to provide any evidence that the Claimant had an outstanding loan or that the loan for which he acted as guarantor had defaulted, except...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2025] KECPT 356 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: David Mbogo; Respondent: Buscar Sacco Limited
Court
Cooperative Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Tribunal Case 12/E021 of 2023
Procedural Posture
Refund Claim / Judgment
Outcome
judgment for the applicant
Judges
Janet Mwatsama, B Sawe, F Lotuiya, P. Gichuki, M Chesikaw, PO Aol
Legal Topics
Sacco Member Refund, Guarantor Liability, Share Capital Deduction
Source Language
english
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Sacco Member Refund Guarantor Liability Share Capital Deduction

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

Parties

David Mbogo

Applicant

Buscar Sacco Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refund Claim / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the Claimant is entitled to a refund of his savings from the Respondent Sacco.
  2. 2 Whether the Claimant's guarantorship obligations affect his entitlement to the refund.
  3. 3 Whether the Respondent has provided sufficient evidence of any outstanding liability by the Claimant as guarantor.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that the Claimant had established, through undisputed documentary evidence, that he had savings of Kshs.176,000 with the Respondent Sacco. The Respondent failed to provide any evidence that the Claimant had an outstanding loan or that the loan for which he acted as guarantor had defaulted, except for a guaranteed amount of Kshs.20,000. The Tribunal held that the Claimant's responsibility as guarantor was limited to Kshs.20,000, which was properly deducted from his refund. Since the Respondent did not prove any further liability or default, the Claimant was entitled to a refund of Kshs.156,000, plus costs and interest. The Tribunal emphasized that mere assertion of...

Court Disposition

judgment for the applicant

Orders

  • The Respondent shall pay the Claimant Kshs.156,000 as refund of savings, after deducting Kshs.20,000 guaranteed amount.
  • The Respondent shall pay costs of the suit to the Claimant.