Mutua & 25 others v Nyoike & 2 others (Tribunal Case E437 of 2021) [2026] KECOPT 249 (KLR) (28 May 2026) (Ruling)
The Tribunal held that the Respondents had not shown cause, had continued to disobey the injunction, and had not preserved the subject motor vehicles; however, because committal to civil jail affects liberty, the Tribunal adopted a further step and ordered the Respondents to appear in person and show cause before...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2026] KECOPT 249 (KLR)
- Parties
- Claimant: Mburu Mutua & 25 others; Respondent: Edward Nyoike & 2 others
- Court
- Cooperative Tribunal
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Tribunal Case E437 of 2021
- Procedural Posture
- Cooperative Tribunal Contempt Ruling / Ruling on Show Cause for Contempt After Interlocutory Injunction
- Outcome
- Respondents ordered to appear in person and show cause why they should not be punished for contempt.
- Judges
- ["J Mwatsama", "B Sawe", "F Lotuiya", "M Chesikaw", "PO Aol"]
- Legal Topics
- Interlocutory Injunction, Preservation of Subject Matter, Contempt for Disobedience of Court Orders, Show Cause Proceedings, Transport SACCO Dispute
- 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
Mburu Mutua & 25 others
Claimant
Edward Nyoike & 2 others
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Cooperative Tribunal Contempt Ruling / Ruling on Show Cause for Contempt After Interlocutory Injunction
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Respondents remained in contempt of the Tribunal’s orders issued on 19 April 2023
- 2 Whether the changed status of the motor vehicles affected the enforceability of the interim injunction
- 3 Whether the Respondents should be committed to civil jail or first be required to appear and show cause
Ratio Decidendi
The Tribunal held that the Respondents had not shown cause, had continued to disobey the injunction, and had not preserved the subject motor vehicles; however, because committal to civil jail affects liberty, the Tribunal adopted a further step and ordered the Respondents to appear in person and show cause before any punishment is imposed.
Court Disposition
Respondents ordered to appear in person and show cause why they should not be punished for contempt.
Orders
- Each Respondent shall appear before the Tribunal in person on 11 June 2026 to show cause why they should not be punished for contempt of the Tribunal’s orders.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
Mutua & 25 others v Nyoike & 2 others (Tribunal Case E437 of 2021) [2026] KECOPT 249 (KLR) (28 May 2026) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2026] KECOPT 249 (KLR) Republic of Kenya In the Cooperative Tribunal Tribunal Case E437 of 2021 J Mwatsama, Ag Chair, B Sawe, F Lotuiya, M Chesikaw & PO Aol, Members May 28, 2026 Between Mburu Mutua & 25 others & 25 others & 25 others Claimant and Edward Nyoike & 2 others & 2 others & 2 others Respondent Ruling 1.On 19th April, 2023, the Tribunal made the following orders to the effect:1.That pending the hearing and determination of this suit, interim orders of injunction are granted restraining the Respondents by themselves, their employees, agents and or anybody working under them from interference, with the running of the Claimant’s transport business especially Motor Vehicle Registration numbers KCL 608W and KBW 291U or any other motor vehicle within the Sacco that belongs to the Applicants.2.That pending the hearing and determination of this suit, this Honourable Court orders the Respondents to produce in court all information relating to the Society, including: internal regulations, registers, Minutes of General meetings, supervisory committees, reports, annual accounts and inventories for the access by the members and supervision of court.3.Costs granted in the cause. 2.In its ruling delivered on 11th September, 2025, the Tribunal found the Respondents jointly and severally to be in contempt of the Tribunal orders made on 19th April, 2023 and directed them to appear before the Tribunal on 16th February, 2026 and show cause why they should not be committed to civil jail for failure to obey the Tribunal’s said orders made on the 19th April, 2023 and issued on 12th June, 2023. 3.As at the date of writing this Ruling, the Respondents had not filed any affidavit to show cause, while the Claimants had filed a further affidavit sworn by Peter Mburu Mutua on 16th March, 2026. We note that though the said further affidavit alludes to the existence of an affidavit sworn by an unnamed Respondent on 27th January, 2026, we have no such document on record. It follows therefore that none of the Respondents have attempted to show cause why they should not be condemned to civil jail. 4.However, having read the further affidavit of the Claimant sworn on 16th March, 2026, we note that the Claimant makes raises two points:1.That motor vehicle registration number KCL 608W is currently registered with a different Sacco after attempts to have it operate under Ginyali Sacco failed;2.That motor vehicle registration number KBW 291U was sold to one Francis Njenga who had since managed to have it licensed through Ginyali Sacco. 5.It is therefore clear to us that the state of the said vehicles has since changed and they are no longer subject to the orders made on 19th April, 2023. 6.It is of great concern, however, that the same vehicle that could not be licensed under the 1st Claimant has might now have been licensed under a buyer within the same Sacco. 7.It is trite that interlocutory orders are issued to preserve the subject matter of the suit pending final determination of the suit. Considering that the matter herein concerns more than 25 Claimants, and noting that the orders made on 19th April were meant to preserve the two motor vehicles mentioned therein among others and whereas it is now clear that the two subject motor vehicles have not been preserved, we can only conclude that not only did the Respondents continue to disobey the court orders, they intentionally further failed to show cause through their advocates, why they should not be committed to civil jail. 8.As committal to civil jail is a step that would curtail the liberty of the Respondents and while it is important to demonstrate that court orders must be obeyed, we hereby order the Respondents to each appear before the Tribunal in person on 11th June 2026 to show cause why they should not be punished for contempt of the Tribunal’s orders. RULING DATED AND DELIVERED VIRTUALLY AT NAIROBI THIS 28TH DAY OF MAY, 2026.HON. J. MWATSAMA AG. CHAIRPERSON SIGNED 28.5.2026HON. BEATRICE SAWE MEMBER SIGNED 28.5.2026HON. FRIDAH LOTUIYA MEMBER SIGNED 28.5.2026HON. MICHAEL CHESIKAW MEMBER SIGNED 28.5.2026HON. P. AOL MEMBER SIGNED 28.5.2026Tribunal Clerk MutaiKaranja advocate for the ApplicantMararo h/b Gikenya for the RespondentHON. J. MWATSAMA AG. CHAIRPERSON SIGNED 28.5.2026