Kenya Case Law

African Banking Corporation Limited v City Gas Limited & 3 others

African Banking Corporation Limited v City Gas Limited & 3 others [2025] KEHC 10064 (KLR)

Court

High Court

Case number

Civil Suit 434 of 2017

Judge

RC Rutto

The court found that the Plaintiff advanced a loan to the 1st Defendant, secured by a legal charge and guarantees from the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th Defendants. The guarantees, though stamped late, were valid and enforceable as continuing security, covering both the original and restructured facilities. The sale of the charged property was proper, conducted with the 2nd Defendant’s consent, and above market value. On the in duplum rule, the court held that the Plaintiff overstated the recoverable amount by simply doubling the outstanding sum at default without substantiating the calculation. The actu…

Source excerpt

• Loan Facility Disputes
• Guarantee Enforcement
• In Duplum Rule
• Secured Transactions

Muhugu Limited v KCB Bank Kenya Limited; Devshibhai & Sons Limited (Interested Party)

Muhugu Limited v KCB Bank Kenya Limited; Devshibhai & Sons Limited (Interested Party) [2025] KEHC 10025 (KLR)

Court

High Court

Case number

Commercial Case E176 of 2024

Judge

PM Mulwa

High Court dismissed an application to stop a bank’s sale of charged property, finding the borrower had not shown a prima facie case or evidence of overcharging.

• Statutory Power Of Sale
• Injunctive Relief
• Loan Default
• Mortgage Enforcement
• In Duplum Rule
• Contractual Obligations

Rono v Bank of Africa Limited & another

Rono v Bank of Africa Limited & another [2025] KEHC 9089 (KLR)

Court

High Court

Case number

Commercial Case E005 of 2025

Judge

RN Nyakundi

The court found that the defence of res judicata was inapplicable because the previous suit was dismissed for want of prosecution, which is not a determination on the merits. The applicant established a prima facie case by demonstrating that the loan period had been extended, alternative repayment arrangements were in place, and there were legitimate questions regarding compliance with statutory notice requirements and the in duplum rule. The court held that the potential loss of a developed commercial property, including disruption to tenants and a licensed educational institution, constitut…

Source excerpt

• Injunctive Relief
• Statutory Power Of Sale
• Loan Restructuring
• In Duplum Rule
• Res Judicata
• Statutory Notices

Mayanda Kimoon Engineering Company Limited v Baraka Credit Limited

Mayanda Kimoon Engineering Company Limited v Baraka Credit Limited [2025] KEHC 7131 (KLR)

Court

High Court

Case number

Civil Suit E022 of 2024

Judge

E Ominde

The court found that it had jurisdiction to hear the matter as the subject property and the applicant's business were located in Eldoret. On the merits of the injunction application, the court held that the applicant had established a prima facie case by demonstrating that the respondent failed to provide adequate proof of service of the statutory notices required under the Land Act prior to seeking to realize the security. The court noted that the burden of proving service of such notices lies with the chargee, and the respondent did not produce sufficient evidence of service. The court furt…

Source excerpt

• Statutory Power Of Sale
• Injunctive Relief
• Loan Default
• Service Of Statutory Notices
• In Duplum Rule
• Jurisdiction Of High Court

Macharia v High Education Loans Board

Macharia v High Education Loans Board [2025] KEHC 5663 (KLR)

Court

High Court

Case number

Petition E431 of 2023

Judge

LN Mugambi

The High Court held that HELB may impose contractual penalties for default if provided in the loan agreement, but not criminal fines without court process.

• Right To Fair Trial
• Statutory Interpretation
• Student Loans
• Contractual Penalties
• In Duplum Rule
• Constitutional-law

Mburu v Kiambi & another

Mburu v Kiambi & another [2025] KEHC 5108 (KLR)

Court

High Court

Case number

Civil Appeal E121 of 2024

Judge

RC Rutto

High Court partly allowed a loan appeal, finding the trial court misapplied the burden of proof and entering judgment for Ksh 450,000 with interest.

• Loan Agreements
• Burden Of Proof
• Interest Calculation
• In Duplum Rule
• Contract Enforcement
• Loan-agreements

ARK Development Initiative v Mwange

ARK Development Initiative v Mwange [2025] KEHC 5439 (KLR)

Court

High Court

Case number

Civil Appeal E033 of 2024

Judge

AN Ongeri

The High Court found that the trial court erred by allowing the respondent's shares and savings to offset the outstanding loan, as there was no contractual provision permitting such an offset. The principle from National Bank of Kenya v Pipeplastic [2001] eKLR was applied, emphasizing that courts cannot rewrite contracts but must interpret them as agreed by the parties. The appellate court held that the respondent is bound to repay the outstanding loan balance of Kshs. 165,175 together with interest at court rates and costs, setting aside the trial court's judgment. However, the court acknowl…

Source excerpt

• Loan Repayment Disputes
• Contractual Interpretation
• In Duplum Rule
• Judicial Discretion

ARK Development Initiative v Kalwale

ARK Development Initiative v Kalwale [2025] KEHC 5441 (KLR)

Court

High Court

Case number

Civil Appeal E032 of 2024

Judge

AN Ongeri

High Court appeal in a loan dispute allowed the appellant’s challenge to an order offsetting debt with shares and savings, and entered judgment for the outstanding balance.

• Loan Repayment Disputes
• Contractual Interpretation
• In Duplum Rule
• Judicial Discretion
• Loan-repayment-disputes
• Contractual-interpretation

Ark Development v Mghoi

Ark Development v Mghoi [2025] KEHC 5457 (KLR)

Court

High Court

Case number

Civil Appeal E031 of 2024

Judge

AN Ongeri

High Court appeal on whether a trial court could offset a loan debt with a borrower's shares and savings. The court held it could not and entered judgment for the lender.

• Loan Enforcement
• Contractual Interpretation
• In Duplum Rule
• Interest Calculation
• Loan-enforcement
• Contractual-interpretation

Salene Credit Limited v Karanja & another

Salene Credit Limited v Karanja & another [2025] KEHC 5183 (KLR)

Court

High Court

Case number

Civil Appeal E097 of 2024

Judge

RC Rutto

The High Court held that the in duplum rule under Section 44A of the Banking Act applies only to banks and financial institutions as defined by the Act, which are either gazetted as such or accept deposits from the public. The appellant, Salene Credit Limited, was not shown to be a financial institution within the meaning of the Act, nor was there evidence it was a deposit-taking entity. Therefore, the trial court erred in applying the in duplum rule to limit the recoverable amount. The court found that the contractual terms between the appellant and the respondents governed the interest rate…

Source excerpt

• Loan Agreements
• In Duplum Rule
• Interest Rate Regulation
• Non Deposit Taking Institutions