1. I have considered the plaintiff’s application dated 12th September 2024, which seeks judgment on admission in the sum of KShs. 32,598,000/=, together with interest at the rate of 14% per annum from 1st May 2024 until payment in full.
2. The application is opposed through grounds of opposition and a replying affidavit sworn on 20th February 2025, both of which I have duly considered, alongside the parties’ respective submissions.
3. Order 13 Rule 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules permits a party to apply for judgment on admission without awaiting the determination of all other issues in the suit. The crux of this application lies in a letter dated 19th July 2024, written on the defendant’s official letterhead and addressed to the plaintiff. The letter acknowledges past transactions between the parties, enumerates payments made to the plaintiff, and specifies an outstanding balance of KShs. 32,598,000/=. The defendant further provides reasons for the non-payment of the amount.
4. The defendant’s averment that the letter was not authored by it and that its contents are unfamiliar is, in my view, an afterthought. This is particularly so given that the plaintiff’s claim is further supported by invoices issued to the defendant, which the defendant neither denies nor explains away.
5. Moreover, the defendant, in paragraph 6 of its statement of defence, expressly admits the contents of paragraph 8 of the plaint. The defendant acknowledges having procured the sugar consignment in question for sale to a third party on behalf of the plaintiff, and confirms that it undertook to source a market for the consignment, with payment to be effected once the buyer made payment.
6. These admissions are consistent with the contents of the letter dated 19th July 2024. The defendant’s subsequent denial, as advanced in its replying affidavit, is therefore not credible and appears to be made in bad faith.
7. The absence of a director’s signature on the letter does not, by itself, discredit its authenticity. The specificity of the transactions outlined therein, including figures, dates, and the nature of the payments, clearly demonstrates that the letter emanated from a person with full knowledge of the parties' dealings.
8. The letter transparently sets out the terms and expectations regarding payment, without any caveats or reservations. It unequivocally states the amount due and owing as KShs. 32,598,000/=, which is the same sum claimed in the plaint.
9. I am satisfied that the evidence on record discloses an admission that meets the threshold articulated by the Court of Appeal in Choitram v Nazari [1984] KLR 327. The admissions contained in both the defendant’s statement of defence and the letter of 19th July 2024 are express, clear, unequivocal, and unconditional.
Disposition
10. Accordingly, the plaintiff’s application dated 12th September 2024 is allowed. Judgment is hereby entered for the plaintiff against the defendant in the sum of KShs. 32,598,000/=, together with interest at the rate of 14% per annum from 1st May 2024 until payment in full.
11. The costs of the application shall be borne by the defendant.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED IN NAIROBI
THIS 29TH DAY OF JULY 2025
F. MUGAMBI
JUDGE
2. The application is opposed through grounds of opposition and a replying affidavit sworn on 20th February 2025, both of which I have duly considered, alongside the parties’ respective submissions.
3. Order 13 Rule 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules permits a party to apply for judgment on admission without awaiting the determination of all other issues in the suit. The crux of this application lies in a letter dated 19th July 2024, written on the defendant’s official letterhead and addressed to the plaintiff. The letter acknowledges past transactions between the parties, enumerates payments made to the plaintiff, and specifies an outstanding balance of KShs. 32,598,000/=. The defendant further provides reasons for the non-payment of the amount.
4. The defendant’s averment that the letter was not authored by it and that its contents are unfamiliar is, in my view, an afterthought. This is particularly so given that the plaintiff’s claim is further supported by invoices issued to the defendant, which the defendant neither denies nor explains away.
5. Moreover, the defendant, in paragraph 6 of its statement of defence, expressly admits the contents of paragraph 8 of the plaint. The defendant acknowledges having procured the sugar consignment in question for sale to a third party on behalf of the plaintiff, and confirms that it undertook to source a market for the consignment, with payment to be effected once the buyer made payment.
6. These admissions are consistent with the contents of the letter dated 19th July 2024. The defendant’s subsequent denial, as advanced in its replying affidavit, is therefore not credible and appears to be made in bad faith.
7. The absence of a director’s signature on the letter does not, by itself, discredit its authenticity. The specificity of the transactions outlined therein, including figures, dates, and the nature of the payments, clearly demonstrates that the letter emanated from a person with full knowledge of the parties' dealings.
8. The letter transparently sets out the terms and expectations regarding payment, without any caveats or reservations. It unequivocally states the amount due and owing as KShs. 32,598,000/=, which is the same sum claimed in the plaint.
9. I am satisfied that the evidence on record discloses an admission that meets the threshold articulated by the Court of Appeal in Choitram v Nazari [1984] KLR 327. The admissions contained in both the defendant’s statement of defence and the letter of 19th July 2024 are express, clear, unequivocal, and unconditional.
Disposition
10. Accordingly, the plaintiff’s application dated 12th September 2024 is allowed. Judgment is hereby entered for the plaintiff against the defendant in the sum of KShs. 32,598,000/=, together with interest at the rate of 14% per annum from 1st May 2024 until payment in full.
11. The costs of the application shall be borne by the defendant.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED IN NAIROBI
THIS 29TH DAY OF JULY 2025
F. MUGAMBI
JUDGE