Andrew Njoroge Mburu v NIC Bank Limited & another [2020] eKLR Case Summary

Court
High Court of Kenya at Eldoret
Category
Civil
Judge(s)
H.A. Omondi
Judgment Date
July 21, 2020
Country
Kenya
Document Type
PDF
Number of Pages
3
Explore the case summary of Andrew Njoroge Mburu v NIC Bank Limited & another [2020] eKLR, highlighting key legal principles and outcomes. Perfect for legal professionals and students.

Case Brief: Andrew Njoroge Mburu v NIC Bank Limited & another [2020] eKLR

1. Case Information:
- Name of the Case: Dr. Andrew Njoroge Mburu v. NIC Bank Limited & Joseph M. Gikonyo T/A Garam Investments
- Case Number: HCCC 57 OF 2018 (Formerly ELC NO 423 OF 2015)
- Court: High Court of Kenya at Eldoret
- Date Delivered: 21st July 2020
- Category of Law: Civil
- Judge(s): H.A. Omondi
- Country: Kenya

2. Questions Presented:
The central legal issues the court must resolve include:
- Whether the matter was effectively settled between the parties and if so, the implications for costs.
- Who should bear the costs of the litigation given the circumstances surrounding the settlement.

3. Facts of the Case:
The plaintiff, Dr. Andrew Njoroge Mburu, obtained a loan of Kshs. 4,000,000 from NIC Bank Limited (1st Defendant) on 11th March 2013, which was secured by a charge over his property, NYANDARUA/GILGIL WEST/682. Due to payment defaults, the bank sought to exercise its statutory power of sale, leading to a dispute. The plaintiff contested the legality of the charges and sought a declaration that they were null and void, along with an injunction to prevent the sale of his property. The defendants, through their counsel, later indicated that the matter was settled, but the plaintiff contested this assertion, claiming he was not privy to the settlement discussions.

4. Procedural History:
The case was marked as settled following the defendants' application for a stay of proceedings pending appeal. However, the plaintiff disputed the validity of this settlement, asserting that he was not involved in the negotiations. The court did not hear the matter in full but addressed the issue of costs through written submissions from both parties.

5. Analysis:
- Rules: The court considered Section 27 of the Civil Procedure Act, which provides that costs follow the event unless the court orders otherwise. This section grants the court discretion in determining costs.
- Case Law: The court referenced *Alexander Tryphon Dembeniotis v. Central Africa Co. Ltd* [1967] EA 310, which established that costs should follow the event when a party succeeds in their main claim. Additionally, the decision in *Party of Independent Candidate & Anor v. Mutula Kilonzo & 2 Others* [2013] eKLR highlighted the importance of considering the conduct of parties in determining costs.
- Application: The court analyzed the circumstances surrounding the purported settlement. It noted that the plaintiff was not a party to the consent agreement and that the defendants had made significant concessions. The court reasoned that both parties had engaged in negotiations that led to the settlement, thus considering the overall conduct and contributions of both sides in the litigation.

6. Conclusion:
The court ruled that each party should bear its own costs, emphasizing that the history of the case and the nature of the settlement negotiations warranted such a decision. The ruling reflects the court's discretion in applying costs principles, acknowledging the complexities involved in the settlement process.

7. Dissent:
There were no dissenting opinions noted in the ruling.

8. Summary:
The High Court of Kenya ruled in favor of neither party regarding costs, determining that each party would bear its own expenses due to the complexities surrounding the settlement negotiations. The case underscores the importance of clear communication and consensus in legal settlements, as well as the court's discretion in determining costs based on the conduct of the parties involved.

Document Summary

Below is the summary preview of this document.

  • Andrew-Njoroge-Mburu-v-NIC-Bank-Limited--another-[2020]-eKLR-Case-Summary_1393_0.jpg

This is the end of the summary preview.

Related Documents

View all summaries