[2025] KECPT 240 (KLR)

[2025] KECPT 240 (KLR)

The Tribunal found that the Claimant had sufficiently proved her membership and entitlement to a refund of her savings, as evidenced by her withdrawal notice, payslip, and correspondence. The Respondent failed to provide evidence of any outstanding loan or guarantorship that would lawfully justify withholding the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2025] KECPT 240 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Roselyne Atieno Onyango; Respondent: Metropolitan National Sacco
Court
Cooperative Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Tribunal Case E463 of 2024
Procedural Posture
Refund Claim / Judgment
Outcome
claim partly allowed
Judges
BM Kimemia, Janet Mwatsama, B Sawe, F Lotuiya, P. Gichuki, M Chesikaw, PO Aol
Legal Topics
Cooperative Societies, Refund of Member Savings, Burial Benevolent Fund, Share Capital Non Refundability
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Cooperative Societies Refund of Member Savings Burial Benevolent Fund Share Capital Non Refundability

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Roselyne Atieno Onyango

Applicant

Metropolitan National Sacco

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refund Claim / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the Claimant has proved entitlement to refund of savings from the Respondent on a balance of probabilities.
  2. 2 Whether the Claimant is entitled to refund of share capital and burial benevolent fund contributions.
  3. 3 Whether the Respondent has established any lawful basis to withhold the Claimant's savings.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that the Claimant had sufficiently proved her membership and entitlement to a refund of her savings, as evidenced by her withdrawal notice, payslip, and correspondence. The Respondent failed to provide evidence of any outstanding loan or guarantorship that would lawfully justify withholding the refund. The Tribunal held that the share capital and burial benevolent fund contributions were not refundable under the applicable law and society rules. The Tribunal corrected a typographical error in the claim amount, awarding the Claimant the sum reflected in her payslip (Kshs. 461,589.07) rather than the erroneously stated Kshs. 461. The Tribunal thus ordered the refund of...

Court Disposition

claim partly allowed

Orders

  • The Respondent shall refund the Claimant Kshs. 461,589.07.
  • Claims for refund of share capital and burial benevolent fund are dismissed.