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)
Judgment Date
August 27, 2020
Country
Kenya
Document Type
PDF
Number of Pages
3
Explore the case summary of Pegeon Express Safaris v Management Board Savings Co-Operative Sacco Ltd [2020] eKLR, detailing key legal findings and implications for cooperative management 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)
- Country: Kenya

2. Questions Presented:
The court must resolve the following legal issues:
- Whether the Claimant has established a proper basis to warrant the grant of the injunctive orders sought.
- Who should bear the costs of the application.

3. Facts of the Case:
The Claimant, Pegeon Express Safaris, sought urgent orders to allow its motor vehicle (registration number KCY 349A) to continue passenger transport services, which the Respondent, Management Board Savings Co-operative SACCO Ltd, had halted. The motor vehicle was purchased with loans from the Respondent and NCBA Bank, and was jointly registered to secure repayment. The Respondent claimed that the Claimant, which had previously held corporate membership, had reverted to individual membership and thus could not operate the vehicle under the Respondent's auspices without transferring ownership. The Claimant contended that the Respondent's demand for transfer was unreasonable and that they remained members.

4. Procedural History:
The Claimant filed a Miscellaneous Application on June 18, 2020, seeking various orders. The Respondent opposed the application through affidavits. The Tribunal directed written submissions from both parties, which were filed in July 2020. The Tribunal subsequently framed the issues for determination based on the submissions and evidence provided.

5. Analysis:
- Rules: The Tribunal considered the provisions of the Co-operative Societies Act (Cap 490) and the Civil Procedure Rules regarding temporary injunctions. The conditions for granting such injunctions were based on established legal principles from previous case law, particularly the case of *Giella v. Cassman Brown & Co. Ltd (1973) EA 360*.

- Case Law: The Tribunal referenced *Mrao Ltd v. First American Bank of Kenya Ltd (2003) eKLR*, which defined a prima facie case as one that shows an infringement of a right and a probability of success. This case was relevant in evaluating whether the Claimant had established a prima facie case.

- Application: The Tribunal found that the Claimant had established a prima facie case, as the motor vehicle was jointly registered and could not be transferred without loan repayment. The Claimant also demonstrated that halting operations would cause irreparable harm, as it would lose the opportunity to operate its business. The balance of convenience favored the Claimant, leading to the conclusion that the injunction should be granted.

6. Conclusion:
The Tribunal ruled in favor of the Claimant, allowing the motor vehicle to continue operating pending the determination of the main claim. The Claimant was directed to file the main claim within three months, failing which the orders would lapse. Costs of the application were to be borne by the Respondent.

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

8. Summary:
The Tribunal granted the Claimant's application, allowing its motor vehicle to resume operations while requiring the Claimant to file a main claim within three months. This ruling underscores the importance of membership status in cooperative societies and the implications of loan agreements on asset ownership. The decision is significant in clarifying the rights of members within cooperative frameworks, particularly regarding asset management and operational authority.

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_1850_0.jpg

This is the end of the summary preview.

Related Documents

View all summaries