Peter Mbugua Kanoi & 5 others v Coffee Board of Kenya & another [2015] KEELRC 1037 (KLR)
The bottom line
#What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether an unsigned cheque issued to an auctioneer constitutes a binding commitment to pay the agreed fees
Yes. The issuance of the unsigned cheque, together with part payment in cash and by RTGS, induced the auctioneer to stay execution and constitutes a commitment; the Judgment Debtor is estopped from denying the agreed figure of Kshs.3,200,000
The court found that the Judgment Debtor issued an unsigned cheque of Kshs.3.2 million which caused the execution process to be stayed, and on the same date paid Kshs.200,000 in cash, followed by Kshs.1 million by RTGS. The Respondents did not deny issuing the cheque, only contending it was issued to stop execution. Invoking Section 120 of the Evidence Act and the estoppel authorities, the court held the auctioneer believed the fees had been agreed and acted on that belief by staying execution, so the commitment is binding.
Whether the auctioneers' fees should be taxed before the Deputy Registrar
No. The fees were agreed between the parties and are not subject to taxation; the ex parte order directing taxation was set aside to that extent
Applying the estoppel principle, the court found the parties had agreed on the fees for both phases of attachment. Relying on the Court of Appeal decision on agreed fees in an election petition, the court held that a party who has agreed on a fee threshold cannot go back and subject the bill to higher taxation. The ex parte order of 17th November 2014, obtained without the auctioneer having been enjoined, was therefore set aside to the extent that it required taxation.
Legal principles established
#- The doctrine of estoppel precludes a person from denying a commitment where his conduct, including issuance of a cheque, induced another to act to his detriment
- An unsigned cheque issued towards agreed fees operates as a lien and proof of the amount owed and payable later
Court orders
#- 1.The ex parte order dated 17th November 2014 is set aside to the extent that the Auctioneers' fees will not be taxed but shall be paid as already agreed upon by the parties, being Kshs.3,200,000 in the 1st phase of attachment less Kshs.1.2 million already paid
- 2.Kshs.1,050,000 is payable for the 2nd phase of attachment
- 3.The application dated 24/10/2014 is overridden by the ruling herein and the consent of the parties dated 29/1/2015
- 4.Any attached property should be released to the Judgment Debtor upon payment of the Auctioneers' charges
- 5.The Respondents to pay the costs of the application
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Order 51 Rules 1, 3 and 15 of the Civil Procedure Rules, Section 3A and Section 63(e) of the Civil Procedure Act
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Peter Mbugua Kanoi & 5 others v Coffee Board of Kenya & another [2015] KEELRC 1037 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2015). Cause No 1314 of 2011. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2015/1037/eng@2015-05-25
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.