[2019] KEHC 10213 (KLR)
The High Court held that the dispute arose from a sugar contract and was therefore a special damages claim. The Court of Appeal in John Richard Okuku vs. South Nyanza Sugar Co. Ltd had already settled that in such cases, interest must run from the date of filing suit. The trial court erred by awarding interest from...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2019] KEHC 10213 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Pius Odongo M. Kabuya; Respondent: South Nyanza Sugar Co. Ltd
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Migori
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Appeal 46 of 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal allowed
- Judges
- AC Mrima
- Legal Topics
- Interest Award, Special Damages, Sugar Contracts
- 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
Pius Odongo M. Kabuya
Appellant
South Nyanza Sugar Co. Ltd
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether interest on the judgment sum should run from the date of filing suit or from the date of judgment in a sugar contract dispute under the repealed Sugar Act.
Ratio Decidendi
The High Court held that the dispute arose from a sugar contract and was therefore a special damages claim. The Court of Appeal in John Richard Okuku vs. South Nyanza Sugar Co. Ltd had already settled that in such cases, interest must run from the date of filing suit. The trial court erred by awarding interest from the date of judgment, contrary to binding precedent. The High Court set aside the trial court's order and substituted it with an order that interest shall run from the date of filing the suit.
Court Disposition
appeal allowed
Orders
- The trial court's order that interest runs from the date of judgment is set aside.
- Interest shall run from the date of filing the suit in the Magistrates Court at Rongo.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
22 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT
AT MIGORI
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 46 OF 2017
PIUS ODONGO M. KABUYA.....................................APPELLANT
-VERSUS-
SOUTH NYANZA SUGAR CO. LTD.......................RESPONDENT
(Being an appeal from the judgment and decree by Hon. C. M. Kamau, ResidentMagistrate
in Rongo Principal Magistrate's Civil Suit No. 74 of 2014 delivered on 07/03/2017)
JUDGMENT
1. There is only one issue for determination in this appeal. It is on when interest should start running from. The trial court ordered interest to run from the date of the judgment as it considered the dispute between the parties herein as a general damages claim. The Appellant on the other hand was of the position that interest ought to run from the date of filing of the suit since the dispute is a special damages claim.
2. The issue as to when the interest ought to run from has been greatly litigated on in sugar cases and was finally settled by the Court of Appeal in John Richard Okuku vs. South Nyanza Sugar Co. Ltd Kisumu Court of Appeal Civil Appeal No. 278 of 2010 where the Court held that disputes arising from the sugar contracts under the now repealed Sugar Act (like the one in this case) are special damages claims and interest must run from the date of filing of the suit.
3. Since the said decision is binding on this Court as well as the lower courts, I find that the trial court erred in not holding on to the settled legal principle of stare decisis. To that end, respectfully, the trial court erred and the finding that interest ought to start running from the date of judgment is hereby set aside and substituted with an order that the interest shall run from the date of filing the suit in the Magistrates Court at Rongo.
4. The appeal therefore succeeds with costs to the Appellant.
Orders accordingly.
DELIVERED, DATED and SIGNED at MIGORI this 14th day of February 2019.
A. C. MRIMA
JUDGE
Judgment delivered in open Court and in the presence of: -
Mr. OdukCounsel instructed by the firm of Messrs. Oduk & Company Advocates for the Appellant.
Mr. Bosireinstructed by the firm of Moronge & Company Advocates for the Respondent.
Evelyn Nyauke– Court Assistant