[2020] KEHC 4708 (KLR)

[2020] KEHC 4708 (KLR)

The court found that the plaintiff's directors, being the sole shareholders and signatories to the account, authored a clear written instruction to the defendant bank to reverse the disputed transactions, acknowledging the funds as wrongly transferred and suspected to be fraudulent. The plaintiff's subsequent claim...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2020] KEHC 4708 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Map Express Trading (K) Limited; Defendant: Barclays Bank of Kenya Limited
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Case 373 of 2012
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Judgment
Outcome
plaintiff's suit dismissed with costs
Judges
F Tuiyott
Legal Topics
Bank Customer Relationship, Fraudulent Transactions, Injunctive Relief, Pleading Requirements
Source Language
en
Commercial and Corporate Civil Procedure Bank Customer Relationship Fraudulent Transactions Injunctive Relief Pleading Requirements

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 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Map Express Trading (K) Limited

Plaintiff

Barclays Bank of Kenya Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Suit / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the defendant bank was justified in reversing the transactions totaling Kshs.10,130,000/= in the plaintiff's account.
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff's directors' instruction to reverse the entries was given under duress.
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to injunctive and mandatory relief against the bank.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiff's directors, being the sole shareholders and signatories to the account, authored a clear written instruction to the defendant bank to reverse the disputed transactions, acknowledging the funds as wrongly transferred and suspected to be fraudulent. The plaintiff's subsequent claim of duress was not pleaded in the plaint, contrary to the requirements of Order 2 Rule 10(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules, and was unsupported by corroborative evidence. The court held that the bank was justified in acting on the written instructions and that the plaintiff failed to establish any entitlement to the reliefs sought. The claim was therefore dismissed with costs to...

Court Disposition

plaintiff's suit dismissed with costs

Orders

  • The plaintiff's suit is dismissed with costs to the defendant.