[2024] KEHC 13484 (KLR)

[2024] KEHC 13484 (KLR)

The court found that the plaintiff had proved, on a balance of probabilities, that the defendant unlawfully and without justification refused to unblock the plaintiff's bank account after the plaintiff requested the unfreezing. The evidence presented by the plaintiff was uncontroverted, as the defendant failed to...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2024] KEHC 13484 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Dream Big Consultants Limited; Defendant: Diamond Trust Bank (K) Limited, Watamu Branch
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Malindi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Case E008 of 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil Case / Judgment
Outcome
Judgment for the plaintiff.
Judges
SM Githinji
Legal Topics
Bank Account Freezing, Injunctive Relief, Burden of Proof, Damages for Unlawful Action
Source Language
en
Banking and Finance Civil Procedure Bank Account Freezing Injunctive Relief Burden of Proof Damages for Unlawful Action

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 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dream Big Consultants Limited

Plaintiff

Diamond Trust Bank (K) Limited, Watamu Branch

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Case / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the defendant unlawfully and/or illegally blocked or froze the plaintiff's bank account.
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to permanent injunctive relief restraining the defendant from blocking access to the account.
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to damages for the defendant's actions.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiff had proved, on a balance of probabilities, that the defendant unlawfully and without justification refused to unblock the plaintiff's bank account after the plaintiff requested the unfreezing. The evidence presented by the plaintiff was uncontroverted, as the defendant failed to enter appearance or file any defence. The court emphasized that even in undefended suits, the plaintiff bears the burden of proof. The court accepted the plaintiff's evidence that the account was initially frozen at the plaintiff's request to resolve internal company issues, but the defendant's continued refusal to unblock the account after resolution of those issues was...

Court Disposition

Judgment for the plaintiff.

Orders

  • Permanent injunctive orders restraining the defendant from blocking the plaintiff's access to Account No. 0729573001 or dealing with it in any manner detrimental to the plaintiff's rights and interests.
  • Damages for unlawful and illegal acts of the defendant in freezing the plaintiff's bank account in the sum of Kshs. 200,000.