[1998] KEHC 184 (KLR)
The court found that the defendant had admitted the principal debt and did not dispute the statutory penalty. The payment of part of the debt after the suit commenced did not constitute a defence to the claim, and no triable issue was raised. The statutory penalty is mandatory and not subject to defence. The case...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [1998] KEHC 184 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Wellma Insurance Brokers Ltd; Defendant: Muhoroni Sugar Co. Ltd
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- ? 655 of 1998
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Case / Ruling on Summary Judgment Application
- Outcome
- judgment for the plaintiff
- Judges
- A Mbogholi-Msagha
- Legal Topics
- Summary Judgment, Insurance Premiums, Statutory Penalties
- 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
Wellma Insurance Brokers Ltd
Plaintiff
Muhoroni Sugar Co. Ltd
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Case / Ruling on Summary Judgment Application
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to summary judgment for the claimed insurance premium and statutory penalty.
- 2 Whether the defendant has raised a triable issue or valid defence to the claim.
- 3 Whether the statutory penalty under the Insurance Amendment Act of 1996 is payable.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the defendant had admitted the principal debt and did not dispute the statutory penalty. The payment of part of the debt after the suit commenced did not constitute a defence to the claim, and no triable issue was raised. The statutory penalty is mandatory and not subject to defence. The case was deemed clear and obvious, justifying the entry of summary judgment for the plaintiff as prayed in the plaint, including the statutory penalty and costs.
Court Disposition
judgment for the plaintiff
Orders
- Judgment entered for the plaintiff against the defendant as prayed in the plaint.
- Plaintiff awarded costs of the main suit and the application.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
18 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
CIVIL CASE NO. 655 OF 1998
WELLMA INSURANCE BROKERS LTD................................PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
MUHORONI SUGAR CO. LTD........................................................................................DEFENDAN T
R U L I N G
This is an application by way of Notice of Motion under Order 35 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules seeking an order that judgment be entered for the plaintiff against the defendant as prayed in the plaint.
The application is supported by an affidavit sworn by the learned counsel for the plaintiff. The defendant has filed grounds of opposition and a replying affidavit sworn by the learned counsel for the defendant.
In the plaint filed herein on 20th March, 1998 the plaintiff claimed a sum of Kshs. 1, 260,808. 00 plus a penalty of 5% thereon. The sum is said to be total annual premium payable to the plaintiff from the defendant. The 5% penalty claimed on the amount due is the statutory penalty introduced by Insurance Amendment Act of 1996 which is imposed on premiums that remain outstanding beyond 60 days of the risk being placed. The defendants have conceded indebtedness to the plaintiff and that is to be found in the replying affidavit and the submissions herein.
Paragraph 4 of the replying affidavit sworn by the learned counsel for the defendant admits the indebtedness of the principal amount but that half of hte said sum has been paid to the plaintiff. There is also the prayer that the defendant is willing to pay the balance of the principal amount in three instalments.
As I have said, the 5% penalty claimed by the plantiff is a Statutory requirement and no defence would exist against that payment. Secondly judgment can only be entered in a clear and obvious case. Going by the affidavit of the defendant this is thus such a clear and obvious case to warrant the orders sought. It has not been shown that the sum paid by the defendant is in any way connected with the claim herein and in any case it was paid after the commencement of this suit. If there is any connection the parties can reconcile the accounts.
I accordingly enter judgment for the plaintiff against the defendant as prayed in the plaint plus costs of both the main suit and this application.
Orders accordingly
Dated and delivered at Nairobi this 31st day of July, 1998
A. MBOGHOLI MSAGHA
JUDGE
Wanga for the respondent Iseme for the applicant