[2007] KEHC 2008 (KLR)
The court found that the Plaintiffs were suspended in accordance with Article 11 of the Chamber’s Articles of Association, which allows the Governing Council to suspend members for reasonable cause for up to three months, with a right of appeal under Article 12. The Plaintiffs were notified of their suspension and informed of their right to appeal, but chose not to exercise this right and instead approached the court. The court held that, since the Plaintiffs failed to exhaust the internal dispute resolution mechanisms provided by the Chamber’s Articles, they had no right to seek judicial intervention to revoke the suspension. Furthermore, the period of suspension had already lapsed by...
- Citation
- [2007] KEHC 2008 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Wilson Kimani Kang’ethe; Plaintiff: Kings Onyancha Maina; Plaintiff: Kenneth Baikogi Gitobu; Defendant: David Mburu Githere; Defendant: Titus Githui Ruhiu; Defendant: Kenya National Chambers of Commerce and Industry (KNCC & I)
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Judgment Date
- 2 February 2007
- Case Number
- Civil Case 1392 of 2005
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Case / Ruling on Interlocutory Injunction Application
- Outcome
- application dismissed with costs to the defendants
- Legal Topics
- Corporate Governance, Injunctive Relief, Internal Dispute Resolution, Company Articles, Membership Rights
- Source Language
- English
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Wilson Kimani Kang’ethe
Plaintiff
Kings Onyancha Maina
Plaintiff
Kenneth Baikogi Gitobu
Plaintiff
David Mburu Githere
Defendant
Titus Githui Ruhiu
Defendant
Kenya National Chambers of Commerce and Industry (KNCC & I)
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Case / Ruling on Interlocutory Injunction Application
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the suspension of the Plaintiffs from the Chamber was lawful under the Articles of Association and the Companies Act.
- 2 Whether the Plaintiffs are entitled to an injunction restraining the Defendants from suspending them from the Chamber.
- 3 Whether the Defendants were obligated to convene an Extra Ordinary General Meeting upon requisition by the Plaintiffs.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the Plaintiffs were suspended in accordance with Article 11 of the Chamber’s Articles of Association, which allows the Governing Council to suspend members for reasonable cause for up to three months, with a right of appeal under Article 12. The Plaintiffs were notified of their suspension and informed of their right to appeal, but chose not to exercise this right and instead approached the court. The court held that, since the Plaintiffs failed to exhaust the internal dispute resolution mechanisms provided by the Chamber’s Articles, they had no right to seek judicial intervention to revoke the suspension. Furthermore, the period of suspension had already lapsed by...
Court Disposition
application dismissed with costs to the defendants
Orders
- The Chamber Summons filed on 17th November 2005 is dismissed with costs to the Defendants.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment