Carolyn Achieng Otieno v Luhano FSA Sacco Society Limited [2019] eKLR Case Summary

Court
Co-operative Tribunal at Nairobi
Category
Civil
Judge(s)
C. Kithinji (Deputy Chairman), P. Swanya (Member), F.F. Odhiambo (Member)
Judgment Date
January 07, 2019
Country
Kenya
Document Type
PDF
Number of Pages
3
Explore the case summary of Carolyn Achieng Otieno v Luhano FSA Sacco Society Limited [2019] eKLR, detailing key legal principles and findings. Perfect for legal professionals and enthusiasts.

Case Brief: Carolyn Achieng Otieno v Luhano FSA Sacco Society Limited [2019] eKLR

1. Case Information:
- Name of the Case: Carolyn Achieng Otieno v. Luhano FSA Sacco Society Limited
- Case Number: CTC No. 570 of 2017
- Court: Co-operative Tribunal at Nairobi
- Date Delivered: January 7, 2019
- Category of Law: Civil
- Judge(s): C. Kithinji (Deputy Chairman), P. Swanya (Member), F.F. Odhiambo (Member)
- Country: Kenya

2. Questions Presented:
The court must resolve the following legal issues:
1. Whether the Claimant should be granted leave to amend her statement of claim to include a valuation report and remove the second Respondent from the case.
2. Whether the Respondent should bear the costs of the application.

3. Facts of the Case:
The Claimant, Carolyn Achieng Otieno, filed an application seeking to amend her statement of claim. The amendment is based on the receipt of a valuation report that she wishes to include in her claim and to remove the second Respondent, who was initially included as an agent of the first Respondent, Luhano FSA Sacco Society Limited. The second Respondent's involvement is claimed to be overtaken by events as he facilitated the sale of cows that are central to the dispute. The Respondent opposed the application, arguing that the valuation report was unreliable since the cows had already been sold, and maintained that the second Respondent should not be removed from the claim.

4. Procedural History:
The application was filed on September 7, 2018, under various provisions of the Civil Procedure Rules and the Civil Procedure Act. After the Respondent filed a replying affidavit, the case was scheduled for hearing on November 22, 2018. The parties agreed to submit their arguments in writing, which they complied with.

5. Analysis:
Rules:
The court considered Order 8 Rule 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules, which governs the amendment of pleadings. The court emphasized that the primary consideration in allowing amendments is whether they are necessary for the just determination of the controversy between the parties.

Case Law:
The court referenced two key cases:
- Andrew Ouko v. Kenya Commercial Bank Limited & Others (2014) eKLR: This case established that amendments should be allowed if necessary for justice.
- Hiram Bere Kinuthia & Others v. Edick Omondi & Others (2014) eKLR: This case affirmed the court's discretion to allow amendments at any stage of proceedings.

Both cases support the notion that amendments should facilitate justice, and the validity of the evidence presented can be addressed during the main trial.

Application:
The court found that the validity of the valuation report, which the Claimant intended to rely on, is a matter for the main trial and should not be prejudged at this stage. The Claimant has the right to decide what evidence to present. Regarding the removal of the second Respondent, the court agreed with the Claimant that the second Respondent was no longer necessary in the case, as he could only be sued as an agent of the first Respondent. Thus, the amendment to remove him was deemed appropriate.

6. Conclusion:
The court ruled in favor of the Claimant, granting her application to amend her statement of claim. The Claimant was instructed to file the re-amended claim within 14 days. The court decided that costs would abide by the outcome of the main claim, indicating that while the Claimant was successful, the application was also necessary for the Respondent.

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

8. Summary:
The Co-operative Tribunal allowed Carolyn Achieng Otieno's application to amend her statement of claim, permitting her to include a valuation report and remove the second Respondent. The court emphasized the importance of allowing amendments for the just determination of cases, while also maintaining that the validity of the evidence would be assessed during the trial. The ruling highlights the tribunal's commitment to ensuring fair proceedings while addressing procedural matters.

Document Summary

Below is the summary preview of this document.

  • Carolyn-Achieng-Otieno-v-Luhano-FSA-Sacco-Society-Limited-[2019]-eKLR-Case-Summary_1573_0.jpg

This is the end of the summary preview.

Related Documents

View all summaries