Chairlady, Hellen Cherubet & 4 others v Simon Kiptoo Kimoso [2020] eKLR Case Summary

Court
High Court of Kenya at Eldoret
Category
Civil
Judge(s)
Hon. H.A. Omondi
Judgment Date
May 22, 2020
Country
Kenya
Document Type
PDF
Number of Pages
3
Explore the Chairlady, Hellen Cherubet & 4 others v Simon Kiptoo Kimoso [2020] eKLR case summary, highlighting key judgments and implications in legal context.

Case Brief: Chairlady, Hellen Cherubet & 4 others v Simon Kiptoo Kimoso [2020] Eklr

1. Case Information:
- Name of the Case: The Chairlady, Hellen Cherubet, Secretary, Gladys Cherono, Treasurer Carolyn Maru, Taboiyat Women Group, Unit Manager Kenya Women Finance Trust Limited Nandi Hills v. Simon Kiptoo Kimoso
- Case Number: Civil Appeal No 53 of 2019
- Court: High Court of Kenya at Eldoret
- Date Delivered: May 22, 2020
- Category of Law: Civil
- Judge(s): Hon. H.A. Omondi
- Country: Kenya

2. Questions Presented:
The court must resolve the following central legal issues:
- Who is the rightful owner of the cows that were sold?
- Was the chattel instrument void due to improper description?
- Was the repossession of the cows legal?
- Is the respondent entitled to the prayers sought?

3. Facts of the Case:
The respondent, Simon Kiptoo Kimoso, sued the appellants, which included officials from the Taboiyat Women Group and the Kenya Women Finance Trust Limited (KWFT), seeking Kshs 173,000 in damages for loss of user after they allegedly sold his cows to recover a loan taken by his daughter-in-law, Ledisha Jepkorir. The appellants claimed that the cows were security for the loan, which was guaranteed by Maurice Kiprop Too, and that they acted within their rights to repossess the animals due to default on the loan.

4. Procedural History:
The case originated in the Kapsabet Senior Principal Magistrate's Court, where the trial magistrate ruled in favor of the respondent, determining that the respondent was the bona fide owner of the cows and that the chattel mortgage was void due to lack of proper description of the collateral. The appellants appealed the decision on multiple grounds, which were to be canvassed through written submissions.

5. Analysis:
- Rules: The court considered the Chattels Transfer Act, particularly Section 24, which requires proper identification of collateral in a chattel mortgage, and the Evidence Act, specifically Sections 107 and 116, regarding the burden of proof in ownership disputes.
- Case Law: The court referenced *National Bank of Kenya Ltd v Pipeplastic Samkolit (K) Ltd & another* [2001] eKLR, which established that a court cannot rewrite a contract and parties are bound by their terms. Additionally, decisions in *Birket v. Arcon Business Machines Ltd* and *Makula International Ltd v. His Eminence Cardinal Nsubuga* were cited, emphasizing that a court can refuse to enforce illegal transactions regardless of whether illegality was pleaded.
- Application: The court found that the appellants failed to establish that the cows belonged to the borrower or the guarantor. The trial court's conclusion that the chattel mortgage was void due to improper description was upheld. The court noted that the cows were not adequately described in the chattel instrument, which led to the conclusion that the repossession was illegal.

6. Conclusion:
The High Court upheld the trial court's decision, affirming that the respondent had proven ownership of the cows and that the chattel instrument was void. The appeal was dismissed, with costs awarded to the respondent. This ruling reinforces the importance of proper documentation and adherence to statutory requirements in securing loans with collateral.

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

8. Summary:
The High Court of Kenya ruled in favor of Simon Kiptoo Kimoso, affirming that he was the rightful owner of the cows sold by the appellants to recover a loan taken by his daughter-in-law. The court found that the chattel mortgage was void due to improper description, thereby rendering the repossession illegal. The decision highlights the necessity for clarity in loan agreements and the legal implications of failing to comply with statutory requirements regarding collateral.

Document Summary

Below is the summary preview of this document.

  • Chairlady-Hellen-Cherubet--4-others-v-Simon-Kiptoo-Kimoso-[2020]-eKLR-Case-Summary_1472_0.jpg

This is the end of the summary preview.

Related Documents

View all summaries