https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/7672
The court found that because the plaintiff’s injunction had already been dismissed and no injunctive orders remained in force, the plaintiff had no basis to prevent the defendant and its agents from accessing the premises for valuation. The application was therefore allowed and costs awarded against the respondent.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2026] KEHC 7672 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Francis Mugambi Laichena; 1st Defendant: Equity Bank Kenya Limited; 2nd Defendant: Keysian Auctioneers
- Court
- High Court
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Case E010 of 2024
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Case / Ruling on Defendant's Application
- Outcome
- Application allowed.
- Judges
- ["HM Nyaga"]
- Legal Topics
- Statutory Power of Sale, Valuation of Charged Property, Access to Premises for Valuation, Discharge of Injunction, Costs
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Francis Mugambi Laichena
Plaintiff
Equity Bank Kenya Limited
1st Defendant
Keysian Auctioneers
2nd Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Case / Ruling on Defendant's Application
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the defendant should be allowed access to the premises to conduct a fresh valuation of the charged property.
- 2 Whether the absence of an injunction justified the plaintiff's obstruction of the defendant's agents.
- 3 Who should bear the costs of the application.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that because the plaintiff’s injunction had already been dismissed and no injunctive orders remained in force, the plaintiff had no basis to prevent the defendant and its agents from accessing the premises for valuation. The application was therefore allowed and costs awarded against the respondent.
Court Disposition
Application allowed.
Orders
- The respondent shall allow the applicant and its agents access to the premises for valuation.
- Costs of the application shall be borne by the respondent.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
Laichena v Equity Bank Kenya Limited & another (Civil Case E010 of 2024) [2026] KEHC 7672 (KLR) (2 June 2026) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2026] KEHC 7672 (KLR) Republic of Kenya In the High Court at Meru Civil Case E010 of 2024 HM Nyaga, J June 2, 2026 Between Francis Mugambi Laichena Plaintiff and Equity Bank Kenya Limited 1st Defendant Keysian Auctioneers 2nd Defendant Ruling 1.Coming up for determination is the defendant’s application dated 8th November, 2025 which seeks the following orders: 2.The gist of the application is that this court dismissed the plaintiff’s application for injunction, allowing the defendant to proceed to exercise its statutory power of sale. That the plaintiff/respondent has obstructed or prevented the defendant’s agents from accessing the premises in order to conduct a valuation. 3.The respondent did not file a response. 4.On 13th June 2025, the respondent’s application for injunction dated 24th July 2024 was dismissed with an order that fresh valuation be carried out in order to ascertain the current value of the property offered as security. 5.There being no orders of injunction in force, the respondent has no grounds to prevent the applicant and its agents from accessing the premises. 6.I therefore allow the application. 7.The costs to be incurred shall be borne by the respondent. DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT MERU THIS 2ND DAY OF JUNE 2026.…………………………H. M. NYAGAJUDGE.