[2004] KEHC 324 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant was only given 7 days' notice for the special general meeting, contrary to the mandatory 15 days required by the Co-operative Societies Act, 1997. The agenda provided was vague and did not specify the matters to be discussed, depriving the Management Committee and members of the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2004] KEHC 324 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Muka Mukuu Farmers Co-operative Society Ltd; Respondent: The Commissioner for Co-operative Societies, Ministry of Co-operative Development and Marketing
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Appeal 750 of 2004
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Ruling on Interlocutory Application
- Outcome
- Application granted. Orders in terms of prayers (a), (b), (c), (d), and (e) of the Chamber Summons issued. Costs in the cause.
- Legal Topics
- Notice Requirements, Special General Meetings, Procedural Fairness, Cooperative Societies Regulation
- 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
Muka Mukuu Farmers Co-operative Society Ltd
Applicant
The Commissioner for Co-operative Societies, Ministry of Co-operative Development and Marketing
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Interlocutory Application
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant was given adequate notice as required by law for the special general meeting.
- 2 Whether the agenda for the meeting was sufficiently specific to inform members of the matters to be discussed.
- 3 Whether failure to serve proper notice and agenda constitutes a breach of statutory and procedural requirements.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant was only given 7 days' notice for the special general meeting, contrary to the mandatory 15 days required by the Co-operative Societies Act, 1997. The agenda provided was vague and did not specify the matters to be discussed, depriving the Management Committee and members of the opportunity to prepare and respond adequately. The court held that proper notice and a clear agenda are essential for procedural fairness and compliance with statutory requirements. The failure to provide adequate notice and a specific agenda constituted a breach of the law, justifying the grant of the orders sought by the applicant to restrain the meeting and ensure compliance...
Court Disposition
Application granted. Orders in terms of prayers (a), (b), (c), (d), and (e) of the Chamber Summons issued. Costs in the cause.
Orders
- Orders applied for in prayers (a), (b), (c), (d), and (e) of the Chamber Summons granted.
- Application to be filed and served within 21 days.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
24 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT NAIROBI (NAIROBI LAW COURTS)
Civil Appeal 750 of 2004
MUKA MUKUU FARMERS CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD……………....……..APPLICANT
VERSUS
THE COMMISSIONER FOR CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES,MINISTRY OF CO-
OPERATIVE DEVELOPMENTAND MARKETING …...………………………........……….RESPONDENTS
RULING
I have considered the application herein and submissions by counsel. In the course of the submissions, I posed various questions to the Applicant’s advocate.
The Court on a prima facie basis has been made to believe that the Notice dated 7th July, 2004 was received by the Applicant’s office on 21. 7.2004. The Applicant is not a member but as the corporate body or entity representing the interests of the company and members, it was entitled to be notified of the intended meeting to be held on 28th July, 2004.
According to the Co-operative Societies Act, 1997, “a special general meeting” means a general meeting, other than an ordinary general meeting, of which, at least fifteen clear days written notice of the resolution and of the date, time and place of the meeting has been given to each member.
The Applicant says it was served with the Notice on 21st July 2004. I was shown a stamp showing the said date as the date of receipt. The Applicant complains that this gives it only 7 days to prepare for the meeting. That the agenda is vague and they do not know what is to be discussed. The Applicant says that it has not formally received the alleged complaints presented to the District Co-operative Officer. That there is bad faith and intention in calling for the meeting at such a short notice. That even the Chairman and Committee members have not been served personally or by other means with the Notice as required by law.
That the Management Committee does not know what is intended to be discussed and they apprehend that the intention is to procure the withdrawal of the suit against the Bank through extra judicial means.
I have considered the material presented to me and the law referred to the court. It would appear that the 15 days notice is mandatory. The Committee, members may not have been served as members. This could apply to many others. The company has been given 7 days notice. If proved to be true then this is not only inadequate notice but in apparent breach of law. The agenda, applying the law of meetings is vague and does not give notice of what is to be discussed. The Management Committee must have enough time to prepare and know the particulars of the complaints of the members who referred the matter to the Ministry. They should not be ambushed. This is a company of 30,000 members and the documentations, accounts and any other matter must be substantial. The Management Committee is the duly elected representatives of the members, they must be given proper notice not only to explain the company’s position but also their management of the affairs of the company.
Members are also entitled to know the matter to be discussed with particularity so that they can elect to attend or not, canvass or lobby for the resolutions, etc. The purpose and functions of Notice for meetings is not met by the “Notice” herein, on the face of it.
As a result despite the late application a day before the meeting and having considered all the foregoing, I do hereby exercise my discretion in favour of granting the application. I do hereby grant the Orders applied for in terms of prayer (a), (b), (c), (d) and (e) of the Chamber Summons. The Application shall be filed and served with the next 21 days. Costs in the cause.
Dated and delivered at Nairobi on this 27th day of July, 2004.
MOHAMMED K. IBRAHIM
JUDGE
FURTHER ORDER:
In view of the late hour of this Ruling i.e. 5. 30 p.m. and considering the meeting herein is scheduled to take place tomorrow at 10 a.m., I do hereby grant leave to the Applicant to obtain certified copies of this hand-written Ruling and Orders of this court. In order to prevent this order being ineffectual and to ensure compliance of the orders of this court, I do hereby direct that this order may be served with the assistance of the Court Bailiff and the same shall be served on the District Commissioner, Machakos, O.C.P.D. Machakos and District Officer Matungulu Division.
MOHAMMED K. IBRAHIM
JUDGE