Pegeon Express Safaris v Management Board Savings Co-Operative Sacco Ltd [2020] eKLR Case Summary

Court
Co-operative Tribunal at Nairobi
Category
Civil
Judge(s)
Hon. B. Kimemia (Chairman), Hon. F. Terer (Deputy Chairman), P. Gichuki
Judgment Date
August 27, 2020
Country
Kenya
Document Type
PDF
Number of Pages
3
Explore the Pegeon Express Safaris v Management Board Savings Co-Operative Sacco Ltd [2020] eKLR case summary, detailing key legal findings and implications for cooperatives and business practices in Kenya.

Case Brief: Pegeon Express Safaris v Management Board Savings Co-Operative Sacco Ltd [2020] eKLR

1. Case Information:
- Name of the Case: Pegeon Express Safaris v. Management Board Savings Co-operative Sacco Ltd
- Case Number: Tribunal Case Misc. No. 36 of 2020
- Court: Co-operative Tribunal at Nairobi
- Date Delivered: August 27, 2020
- Category of Law: Civil
- Judge(s): Hon. B. Kimemia (Chairman), Hon. F. Terer (Deputy Chairman), P. Gichuki
- Country: Kenya

2. Questions Presented:
The central legal issues for resolution by the court include:
1. Whether the Claimant has established a proper basis to warrant the grant of the injunctive orders sought.
2. Who should bear the costs of the Application.

3. Facts of the Case:
The Claimant, Pegeon Express Safaris, sought injunctive relief against the Respondent, Management Board Savings Co-operative Sacco Ltd, claiming that the Respondent had unlawfully prevented its motor vehicle, registration number KCY 349A, from operating in passenger transport services. The Claimant argues that the vehicle was jointly registered with NCBA Bank as security for loans taken for its purchase. The Respondent contends that the Claimant's corporate membership had been reverted to individual membership, thus affecting the Claimant's rights regarding the vehicle.

4. Procedural History:
The Claimant filed an application on June 18, 2020, seeking urgent orders to allow the vehicle to continue operations pending the determination of the main suit. The Respondent opposed the application through affidavits and claims that the Claimant had ceased to be a corporate member. The application was canvassed through written submissions, with the Claimant submitting on July 9, 2020, and the Respondent on July 22, 2020.

5. Analysis:
- Rules: The application for injunctive relief is grounded in Section 76(1)(b) and 78(2) of the Co-operative Societies Act (Cap 490) of Kenya, and Order 40 Rules 4(e) and (2) and Order 51 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules. The legal standard for granting a temporary injunction is established in *Giella v. Cassman Brown & Co. Ltd* (1973) EA 360, which requires a prima facie case, irreparable injury, and the balance of convenience to favor the applicant.

- Case Law: The court referred to *Mrao Ltd v. First American Bank of Kenya Ltd* (2003) eKLR, which defined a prima facie case as one where evidence shows an infringement of a right that warrants an explanation from the opposing party. This case was relevant in assessing whether the Claimant had established the necessary conditions for an injunction.

- Application: The court analyzed whether the Claimant had a prima facie case by confirming that the motor vehicle was jointly registered and that the Respondent's demand for a transfer of ownership was not tenable until the loan was fully repaid. The court noted that the Respondent had previously issued a Road Service License for the vehicle, indicating acknowledgment of the Claimant's rights. The court concluded that the Claimant would suffer irreparable harm if the injunction were not granted, as it would lose the ability to operate the vehicle.

6. Conclusion:
The court ruled in favor of the Claimant, granting the injunctive orders sought to allow the vehicle to operate pending the determination of the main suit. The court found that the Claimant had established a prima facie case with a probability of success and that the balance of convenience favored granting the injunction.

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

8. Summary:
The Co-operative Tribunal ruled in favor of Pegeon Express Safaris, allowing its motor vehicle KCY 349A to continue operating in passenger transport services. The decision underscores the importance of membership rights within cooperative societies and the legal protections afforded to members regarding property used in business operations. The case highlights the legal complexities surrounding corporate versus individual membership within cooperatives and the implications for ownership and operational rights.

Document Summary

Below is the summary preview of this document.

  • Pegeon-Express-Safaris-v-Management-Board-Savings-Co-Operative-Sacco-Ltd-[2020]-eKLR-Case-Summary_1653_0.jpg

This is the end of the summary preview.

Related Documents

View all summaries