@VVS: Stupid analogy it may be but it captures the situation. Please indulge me without getting emotional.

The Karengata case was won not because of poor service, but because of lack of service. They had locus standii to sue CCN because they showed that the residents of Karengata would suffer without the services by CCN. KK do not have locus standii because the other OMCs have not taken any action against KPRL. They would have to prove that they would suffer more than the other OMCs would because of the inefficiencies. A complaint from the other OMCs does not constitute action against KPRL.

KK are justified in sueing KPRL for loss of business, but their greatest chance of success is if the other OMCs become enjoined in the case.

True! KK can tell the KPRL to piss off! But then what? KK will not be allowed to process any products in the country! How will that benefit you and me, the shareholders of the company? The losses they will incur from loss of business will by far surpass any gains from the court case.

Ofcourse all this is inconsequential if as is being reported in the media, KK agreed to pay all the outstanding dues!

@sasha - You are splitting hairs!
KarenGata residents did get some service just very poor service. If all it took was 'poor service' instead of 'no service' to win the case, CCN would have sent one jamaa to Karen-Langata to cut the grass! Or fill one pothole! Or replace a bulb on one streetlight!

My understanding of Locus Standi is what 'right' you have to sue due to potential of being 'hurt' by the other(s) action/inaction. Therefore, someone else (Total, Shell, etc) not exercising their 'right' does not negate one's (KK) Locus Standi. Why should I be bound by what other lazy bastards don't want to do?

Using your argument, the FIRST plaintiff (or the first to sue) has no Locus Standi coz no-one else has sued! To me it makes no sense! Someone has to take the first step. As for the other firms (Total & Shell) I was letting you know that they (officially) complained except they did not go to Court.

Yes, I agree that others joining in will boost KK's chances of winning but Shell wants out so does not want to 'rock the boat' since it plans to disinvest. Total was 'forced' into kissing MoE's arse coz of the power it has to scuttle the Chevron takeover. In any event, if KK wins vs KPRL... expect a barrage of lawsuits vs KPRL.

KK is forced by law/regs to process at KPRL. I was illustrating that if KK was a passenger on the recklessly driven matatu, it would have wanted to get off.

Actually, there is NOTHING in writing I have seen from nyoike whereas KK's written statement does NOT mention any amount to be paid to KPRL... Read it again!

Erm, you rely on what is reported in the Media? They don't seem to know half of what is going on!

Another reason why the other majors have not been too overt in their challenges to KPRL is that they were previously part of the ownership. You will recall that Shell, BP and Caltex owned 50% of KPRL before they sold their interest to Essar.

By purchasing Caltex's operations in Kenya, Total inherited the goodwill (badwill in this case) that Caltex had with Essar. Both Total and Shell cannot be seen to be shouting too loudly over an asset they previously owned and did not improve (READ decided it was not worth running)!

@VVS: From the plaint and affidavits, KA say that they did not get any service at all. But this is a nullity in the context of our discussion.

Your understanding of locus standii is correct. However, if the same actions/inactions are meted out on another individual in the same manner, and this other individual does not find it necessary to take legal action against these actions, then you do not have locus standii. I wanted to use another analogy here but you may dismiss it as stupid so I leave it there!

I find it curious that both parties are not being forthcoming with the terms of the settlement to the dispute! It may be an uneasy truce, but my concern is that my company has exposed itself to further losses!

I like to believe that the media reports carry some truths in them. But I don't rely entirely on them! I believe I heard Nyoike say that all outstanding dues would be paid at his press conference!

@Wendz: I also have the same info and I think the other OMCs are playing safe here. They have skeletons they do not want outed at this stage! If I were them, I would watch on the sidelines, and wait to pounce once the case was concluded.

I dont understand all all this cat & mouse games, i thought maybe the shanangans were dead & buried so i will never buy any Kenyan OMC shares...