Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Kenya decisions
Decisions matching the current search
Mama Watoto Supermarket v Ncba Bank Kenya Plc [2025] KEHC 9236 (KLR)
The High Court at Kakamega dismissed a motion to review an earlier ruling and stop sale of charged property, finding alleged undervaluation was not new evidence.
Njiru v Nawiri Sacco Society Limited & another [2025] KECPT 349 (KLR)
The Tribunal dismissed a claim for permanent injunction against sale of charged land, finding no basis to restrain realization of security for a defaulted loan.
Anjara Homes Limited & 3 others v Diamond Trust Bank Kenya Limited [2025] KEHC 6319 (KLR)
The court found that the plaintiffs admitted default in servicing the loan facility secured by a charge over the subject property. The evidence demonstrated that the default persisted beyond the COVID-19 pandemic and prior to the floods cited by the plaintiffs. Statutory notices and notifications of sale were properly issued by the defendant in accordance with the law. The property was valued and advertised as required, and the plaintiffs' apprehension of sale at an undervalue was speculative at this stage. The court held that the plaintiffs failed to establish a prima facie case with a proba…
Source excerpt
Divetsity Microfinance Limited v Michuki & 2 others [2025] KEHC 5058 (KLR)
The High Court partially allowed an appeal over unlawful seizure and auction of cows, reducing damages from Kshs. 1,200,000 to Kshs. 400,000.
Kanyua & another v I&M Bank Limited; Antique Auctioneers (Interested Party) [2025] KEHC 4802 (KLR)
The court found that the applicants failed to establish a prima facie case warranting the grant of an interlocutory injunction. The debt was not disputed, and there was no evidence of breach by the respondent or improper issuance of statutory notices. Disputes as to the amount due or interest charged, without demonstration of full payment or overcharge, do not justify restraining the exercise of statutory power of sale. The statutory notices under Sections 90 and 96 of the Land Act were properly issued and served, and the applicants had sufficient time to rectify the default. The loss, if any…
Source excerpt
Waguta v Equity Bank Limited & another [2025] KEHC 3368 (KLR)
The applicant failed to establish a prima facie case that would warrant the grant of an interlocutory injunction, and failed to demonstrate that he would suffer irreparable harm not adequately compensable by damages. Furthermore, several of the prayers sought were final orders improperly sought at an interlocutory stage.
Source excerpt
Pramukh Chemist Limited & another v Kenya Commercial Bank & another [2025] KEHC 3010 (KLR)
The initial statutory notice issued by the respondent in 2021 was only valid for 90 days; the respondent's failure to follow up within this timeframe rendered their subsequent actions under Section 96 (2) (3) in 2023 invalid, requiring new notices to be issued in compliance with the Land Act. However, the applicant's admission of indebtedness meant they did not establish a prima facie case for an injunction under the *Giella v Cassman Brown* principles.
Source excerpt
Githinji v Faulu Microfinance Bank Limited & another [2025] KEHC 216 (KLR)
The High Court dismissed an interlocutory injunction application challenging a bank’s intended sale of charged land, finding the statutory notices were properly issued.
Langat v Bank of Africa Kenya Ltd & another [2024] KEHC 13842 (KLR)
The High Court dismissed a borrower's challenge to a bank auction of charged properties, finding the bank complied with statutory notice requirements and allowing the bank's counterclaim.
Chomba & another v Kenya Women Microfinance Bank Limited & 3 others [2024] KEHC 13712 (KLR)
The court found that the Applicants failed to meet the threshold for grant of interlocutory injunctive relief. The 1st Respondent complied with statutory requirements, including proper service of notices and obtaining a valuation from a qualified valuer, which took into account the condition of the property and prevailing market circumstances. The Applicants relied on a valuation previously impeached by the court and did not demonstrate that the Respondents' valuation was flawed or that the sale price was not the best reasonably obtainable. The Applicants also failed to show that they would s…
Source excerpt
Explore more
