Isaack Kigo Mbugua (Suing on his behalf and on behalf of 500 others member of Kenton Kijabe Hill Co-operative Society) v Kenton Kijabe Hill Sacco Limited (In Liquidation) [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 (Member)
Judgment Date
April 30, 2020
Country
Kenya
Document Type
PDF
Number of Pages
3
Explore the case summary of Isaack Kigo Mbugua vs. Kenton Kijabe Hill Sacco Limited (In Liquidation) [2020] eKLR, highlighting key judgments and implications for the 500 co-operative members involved.

Case Brief: Isaack Kigo Mbugua (Suing on his behalf and on behalf of 500 others member of Kenton Kijabe Hill Co-operative Society) v Kenton Kijabe Hill Sacco Limited (In Liquidation) [2020] eKLR

1. Case Information:
- Name of the Case: Isaack Kigo Mbugua (Suing on his behalf and on behalf of 500 others members of Kenton Kijabe Hill Co-operative Society) v. Kenton Kijabe Hill SACCO Limited (In Liquidation)
- Case Number: Tribunal Case No. 206 of 2019
- Court: Co-operative Tribunal at Nairobi
- Date Delivered: April 30, 2020
- Category of Law: Civil
- Judge(s): Hon. B. Kimemia (Chairman), Hon. F. Terer (Deputy Chairman), P. Gichuki (Member)
- Country: Kenya

2. Questions Presented:
The court must resolve the following legal issues:
- Whether the Claimant has established a proper basis for the Tribunal to issue an order of injunction restraining the Respondent from transferring and/or dealing with specific properties.
- Who should bear the costs of the Application.

3. Facts of the Case:
The Claimant, Isaack Kigo Mbugua, representing himself and 500 other members of the Kenton Kijabe Hill Co-operative Society, filed an application seeking to restrain the Respondent, Kenton Kijabe Hill SACCO Limited, from dealing with certain properties pending the resolution of their suit. The Claimant argues that the liquidator, currently in office, is doing so illegally, as a previous ruling by the High Court declared that the Society did not have a liquidator. Despite this ruling, the Commissioner of Co-operative Development continued the liquidation process, which was halted by a ministerial directive in 2009. The Respondent contends that the Claimant is a vexatious litigant who has filed numerous cases on similar matters in various courts.

4. Procedural History:
The Claimant filed an application on March 22, 2019, which the Respondent opposed through a statement of Grounds of Opposition dated July 1, 2019. The Tribunal directed that the application be disposed of through written submissions; however, neither party complied with this directive. The Tribunal framed the issues for determination based on the presented arguments.

5. Analysis:
- Rules: The Tribunal referenced Order 40 of the Civil Procedure Rules, which allows for temporary injunctions to prevent the wasting or alienation of property. The principles established in *Giella v. Cassman Brown & Company Ltd* [1973] EA 358 were also considered, which require the moving party to establish a prima facie case, demonstrate irreparable damage, and show a balance of convenience.

- Case Law: The case of *Mrao Ltd v. First American Bank of Kenya Ltd* (2008) eKLR was cited, which defined a prima facie case as one where the evidence presented shows an infringement of a right that warrants an explanation from the opposing party. The Tribunal noted that the Claimant's failure to disclose prior related cases could affect the current application, as it could be deemed res judicata or sub judice.

- Application: The Tribunal found that the Claimant failed to establish a prima facie case with a probability of success due to the non-disclosure of previous cases filed on similar issues. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that it would not consider the other two limbs of the *Giella* principles, leading to the dismissal of the application.

6. Conclusion:
The Tribunal dismissed the Claimant's application for an injunction with costs to the Respondent. The parties were directed to comply with Order 11 and proceed with the hearing of the matter.

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

8. Summary:
The Co-operative Tribunal ruled against Isaack Kigo Mbugua, dismissing his application to restrain the Kenton Kijabe Hill SACCO Limited from dealing with certain properties. The decision underscores the importance of full disclosure in legal proceedings and the challenges faced by litigants who pursue multiple lawsuits on similar issues. This case serves as a reminder of the legal principle that equitable remedies require clean hands and the necessity of establishing a prima facie case for injunctions.

Document Summary

Below is the summary preview of this document.

  • Isaack-Kigo-Mbugua-Suing-on-his-behalf-and-on-behalf-of-500-others-member-of-Kenton-Kijabe-Hill-Co-operative-Society-v-Kenton-Kijabe-Hill-Sacco-Limited-In-Liquidation-[2020]-eKLR-Case-Summary_1732_0.jpg

This is the end of the summary preview.

Related Documents

View all summaries