[2015] KEHC 4551 (KLR)

[2015] KEHC 4551 (KLR)

The court found that the injunction granted on 17th October 2014 was expressly conditional, and the Plaintiff failed to comply with those conditions. The Defendant was therefore entitled to exercise its right of sale as stipulated in the order. Since the order of injunction was registered against the title of the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2015] KEHC 4551 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Al-Jalal Enterprises Limited; Defendant: Gulf African Bank Limited
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Case 161 of 2014
Procedural Posture
Civil Case / Ruling on Application to Lift Injunction
Outcome
Application allowed. Injunction lifted and discharged. Costs to the Defendant.
Judges
DO Ogembo
Legal Topics
Injunction Discharge, Breach of Conditional Orders, Auction of Secured Property
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Injunction Discharge Breach of Conditional Orders Auction of Secured Property

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Al-Jalal Enterprises Limited

Plaintiff

Gulf African Bank Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Case / Ruling on Application to Lift Injunction

  1. 1 Whether the injunction granted on 17th October 2014 should be lifted and discharged due to breach of its conditions by the Plaintiff.
  2. 2 Whether the Defendant was entitled to sell the suit property after the Plaintiff's breach of the injunction conditions.
  3. 3 Whether the purchaser can register the transfer without a court order lifting the injunction.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the injunction granted on 17th October 2014 was expressly conditional, and the Plaintiff failed to comply with those conditions. The Defendant was therefore entitled to exercise its right of sale as stipulated in the order. Since the order of injunction was registered against the title of the suit property, and the purchaser could not register the transfer without a court order lifting the injunction, the court held that it was just and proper to lift and discharge the injunction. The absence of any response or opposition from the Plaintiff further supported the Defendant's application. The court accordingly allowed the application, lifting and discharging the...

Court Disposition

Application allowed. Injunction lifted and discharged. Costs to the Defendant.

Orders

  • The injunction granted in the order made on the 17th of October 2014 is hereby lifted and discharged.
  • Costs shall be for the Applicant (Defendant).