Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
Court of AppealDismissedCivil Application No. EO17 of 2020

Yurub Investment Limited & 1 other v Diamond Trust Bank Limited & 1 other

Court of Appeal
21 May 2021
1,103 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~4 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

The Court of Appeal refused to stop the sale of charged land because the borrowers hid key facts from the court and had no arguable appeal.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This was an interlocutory Motion under rule 5(2)(b) of the Court of Appeal Rules in which Yurub Investment Limited and New Nyanza Wholesalers Limited sought orders restraining Diamond Trust Bank Limited and Dalali Traders Auctioneers from attaching, transferring or advertising for sale L.R. No. 209/1063, charged as security for an unpaid loan, pending an intended appeal from Odero J.'s ruling of 5th June 2020 dismissing an injunction application in H.C.C.C. No. 139 of 2018. The bank opposed, showing through its Debt Recovery Officer's affidavit that the applicants had earlier obtained conditional orders halting an auction on terms (settlement of auctioneer's charges and a Kshs. 100 million bank guarantee) which they failed to meet, and that a similar application in the Court of Appeal (Laburnam Courts Limited v Diamond Trust Bank, Civil Application No. E222 of 2020) had been dismissed. The court restated the twin rule 5(2)(b) principles from Stanley Kinyanjui Kangethe v Tony Ketter, held that a party seeking an equitable remedy must come with clean hands per Kawaljeet Singh Zekhi, and found that the applicants had suppressed material facts concerning proceedings in the High Court and the Court of Appeal. Discerning no arguable point in the intended appeal, the court declined to consider the nugatory limb and dismissed the Motion with costs to the 1st respondent. This single-judgment decision binds subordinate courts on the disclosure requirements accompanying equitable relief.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the applicants satisfied the twin principles for relief under rule 5(2)(b)

Holding

The application fails at the first limb; no arguable point was discerned, so the nugatory limb need not be considered

Reasoning

The applicants admitted charging the suit property as security for a loan that went unpaid. Conditional orders of the High Court, including payment into court, were not complied with, and a similar application in the Court of Appeal (Laburnam Courts Limited v Diamond Trust Bank) had been dismissed. These material facts, disclosed only by the respondent, disentitled the applicants from equitable relief.

p. 2
02

Non-disclosure and clean hands as bars to equitable relief

Holding

Applicants failed to disclose material facts concerning prior High Court and Court of Appeal proceedings, so the court declined to exercise its discretion in their favour

Reasoning

The respondent's replying affidavit showed prior conditional orders, the applicants' non-compliance, and a similar dismissed application in the same court. Relying on Kawaljeet Singh Zekhi v Peter Wainaina Kamau, the court held that a party seeking an equitable remedy must come with clean hands; suppression of material facts defeated the Motion.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • An applicant for an injunction or stay under rule 5(2)(b) must demonstrate that the intended appeal is arguable and that it would be rendered nugatory if stay is not granted
  • A party seeking an equitable remedy must come to court with clean hands and make full and frank disclosure of material facts

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The Motion fails and is dismissed with costs to the 1st respondent
On appeal from
High Court of Kenya at Nairobi
H.C.C.C. No. 139 of 2018
Jurisdiction invoked
Rule 5(2)(b) of the Court of Appeal Rules and Article 159 of the Constitution of Kenya, 2010

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Yurub Investment Limited & 1 other v Diamond Trust Bank Limited & 1 other", Case Analysis (2021). Civil Application No. EO17 of 2020. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2021/568/eng@2021-05-21

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.