Justice Sewe, sitting in Mombasa, further ordered Doshi to file its response to the application within the next 14 days.
Doshi Ironmongers, through its lawyer, had opposed the temporary order of suspension being issued saying there was no imminent danger (of execution) and that costs were yet to be taxed.
Doshi had told the court that on February 20, 2002, it entered into a settlement agreement with Haco who agreed to discharge it from all past, present or future liability regarding “the 1996 products” (pens).
The High Court has temporarily suspended the implementation of a judgment which ordered Haco Industries to refund Doshi Ironmongers Sh15 million for breach of an agreement relating to counterfeiting of pens.
Justice Olga Sewe said that there shall be a stay (suspension) of the execution (implementation) of the judgment pending hearing and determination of an application by Haco.
Haco intends to appeal the judgement at the Court of Appeal.
Justice Sewe, sitting in Mombasa, further ordered Doshi to file its response to the application within the next 14 days.
Doshi Ironmongers, through its lawyer, had opposed the temporary order of suspension being issued saying there was no imminent danger (of execution) and that costs were yet to be taxed.
“Pursuant to the judgement, Doshi Ironmongers Ltd is mostly likely to commence executing (implementing) against the applicants, an action that would render the intended appeal nugatory,” argues Haco.
In his supporting affidavit, the company’s finance director Mr Steve Maina says that they have factual and legal issues disclosed in detail in the draft memorandum of appeal.
Among the issues in the draft memorandum of appeal, Mr Maina says, is that the judge erred in law and fact by failing to consider the contents of settlement agreement dated February 20 2002 in its entirety.
Doshi had told the court that on February 20, 2002, it entered into a settlement agreement with Haco who agreed to discharge it from all past, present or future liability regarding “the 1996 products” (pens).
It said that the parties agreed to refer disputes arising to arbitration but Haco breached the agreement when it instituted criminal charges against it in 1996 and 2002.
Doshi claimed that as a result of the plaintiffs’ breach, it suffered loss and damage.
“I do find that the plaintiff (Haco Industries Ltd) did breach the agreement with the counter claimant (Doshi Ironmongers Ltd),” said Justice Otieno.
Justice Otieno further said that Haco Industries Ltd would be unjustly enriched if allowed to keep the money it received for the breached agreement thus justice demands it refunds the money.
