[2024] KECPT 933 (KLR)

[2024] KECPT 933 (KLR)

The tribunal found that the respondent failed to provide any evidence that the claimant remained a guarantor for any outstanding loans, despite being ordered to file the claimant's savings statement. The claimant's assertion that all guaranteed loans had been cleared was unchallenged and supported by the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2024] KECPT 933 (KLR)
Parties
Claimant: Naomi Waeni; Respondent: Yes Sacco Society Limited
Court
Cooperative Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Tribunal Case 246 of 2019
Procedural Posture
Tribunal Claim / Judgment
Outcome
judgment for the claimant
Judges
Janet Mwatsama, B Sawe, F Lotuiya, P. Gichuki, M Chesikaw, PO Aol
Legal Topics
Sacco Member Withdrawal, Guarantor Liability, Refund of Savings
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Banking and Finance Sacco Member Withdrawal Guarantor Liability Refund of Savings

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

Parties

Naomi Waeni

Claimant

Yes Sacco Society Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Tribunal Claim / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the claimant is still a guarantor for any outstanding loans with the respondent.
  2. 2 Whether the claimant is barred from withdrawing her savings while still a guarantor.
  3. 3 Whether the respondent is obligated to refund the claimant's savings upon withdrawal of membership.

Ratio Decidendi

The tribunal found that the respondent failed to provide any evidence that the claimant remained a guarantor for any outstanding loans, despite being ordered to file the claimant's savings statement. The claimant's assertion that all guaranteed loans had been cleared was unchallenged and supported by the respondent's own email correspondence committing to refund her savings within 60 days. The tribunal concluded that the respondent's failure to refund the claimant's savings constituted an unjustified delay and that the claimant was entitled to the full refund of her deposits, together with costs and interest from the date of filing.

Court Disposition

judgment for the claimant

Orders

  • Judgment is entered in favour of the claimant against the respondent for Kshs. 892,000.
  • The respondent shall pay costs of the suit to the claimant.