[2025] KECPT 198 (KLR)

[2025] KECPT 198 (KLR)

The Tribunal found that only the 1st Claimant, as a member of the Respondent Sacco, had locus standi to bring the dispute before the Tribunal. The 2nd and 3rd Claimants, not being members, were not proper parties and their claims could not be entertained by the Tribunal. Regarding the temporary injunction, the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2025] KECPT 198 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Tony Kinyua Mwangi & others; Respondent: Amica Credit Coop. Sacco Limited
Court
Cooperative Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Tribunal Case E706 of 2024
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Interlocutory Injunction
Outcome
Temporary injunction granted in favor of the 1st Claimant; claims of 2nd and 3rd Claimants dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
Judges
BM Kimemia, Janet Mwatsama, B Sawe, F Lotuiya, P. Gichuki, M Chesikaw
Legal Topics
Statutory Power of Sale, Injunctive Relief, Cooperative Societies Disputes, Loan Default, Charge Enforcement, Jurisdiction of Tribunal
Source Language
en
Land and Property Civil Procedure Banking and Finance Statutory Power of Sale Injunctive Relief Cooperative Societies Disputes Loan Default Charge Enforcement +1 more

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tony Kinyua Mwangi & others

Applicant

Amica Credit Coop. Sacco Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Interlocutory Injunction

  1. 1 Whether the 2nd and 3rd Claimants are proper parties before the Tribunal.
  2. 2 Whether the Claimants are entitled to a temporary injunction restraining the Respondent from dealing with the charged properties pending determination of the suit.
  3. 3 Whether the Tribunal has jurisdiction over non-members of the Respondent Sacco.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that only the 1st Claimant, as a member of the Respondent Sacco, had locus standi to bring the dispute before the Tribunal. The 2nd and 3rd Claimants, not being members, were not proper parties and their claims could not be entertained by the Tribunal. Regarding the temporary injunction, the Tribunal noted that the Respondent had served statutory notices but had not produced a valuation report as required under section 97(2) of the Land Act. The Tribunal held that, in the interest of justice and to allow the 1st Claimant an opportunity to negotiate a payment plan, a temporary injunction restraining the Respondent from dealing with the charged properties was warranted...

Court Disposition

Temporary injunction granted in favor of the 1st Claimant; claims of 2nd and 3rd Claimants dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

Orders

  • A temporary injunction is hereby issued restraining the respondent, its officers, employees, servants, agents or any other person claiming under it from advertising, selling by public auction or private treaty, offering for sale, taking possession of, leasing, transferring or in any other manner interfering with or...
  • Mention for pre-trial directions on 17th September 2025.