Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
High CourtDismissed· [2020] KEHC 8639 (KLR)

Abdikadir Arab Mohamud & another v First Community Bank Limited

High Court of Kenya
7 February 2020
4,523 words in judgment
View original judgment Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~18 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

If you owe money on secured property, the bank can sell it, but they must follow strict land sale rules and protect innocent third-party buyers.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Plaintiffs, mortgagors, sought a temporary injunction restraining First Community Bank Limited from selling by public auction the suit property LR 36/11/318, on which the bank had advanced facilities totalling Ksh 70,000,000 under a Diminishing Musharakah financing structure to M/S Golden Real Estate Limited for construction of 28 apartments. The Plaintiffs argued that a 2nd January 2015 opinion of the Bank's Sharia Supervisory Board, which allocated 14 apartments to the bank with rental income therefrom, settled the indebtedness and estopped the bank from selling the whole property. The bank countered that the SSB opinion was not an arbitral award, that the debt remained unpaid (Ksh 100,033,202.83 as at 24th April 2018), and that no irreparable harm would arise. The court framed four issues: indebtedness, entitlement to exercise statutory power of sale, whether a settlement agreement vitiated the charge, and prima facie case. It held the SSB opinion was not an arbitral award under the Arbitration Act but at most a gentleman's agreement to restructure repayment, which could not subrogate the valid charge and mortgage. The plaintiffs admitted receipt of facilities and produced no documents showing repayment or rent remittances offsetting the debt. The injunction application was dismissed with costs. However, the court protected ten flats sold to third-party bona fide purchasers who were never served with statutory notice under Section 96(3) of the Land Act, excluding them from any sale, and imposed conditions: agreement on the debt within 30 days, provision of a comprehensive statement of account, and compliance with Sections 90, 96 and 97 of the Land Act and Rule 15 of the Auctioneers Rules. The interim injunction was to vacate after 30 days.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the First Community Bank Sharia Supervisory Board opinion constituted a binding arbitral award

Holding

It was not an arbitral award; at most it was an agreement to restructure debt repayment, which cannot override the valid charge and mortgage contracts

Reasoning

The court found no arbitration agreement, no appointment of an arbitral tribunal, no rules of arbitration, and no statement of claim as required by Sections 4(2), 12, 20, 24 and 26(1) of the Arbitration Act 1995. The SSB's own mandate was to determine each party's share in the project to enable remedial steps. Hence the opinion merely restructured repayment and did not extinguish the debt or vitiate the charge.

p. 6
02

Whether the plaintiffs established a prima facie case for an injunction

Holding

No - the plaintiffs admitted receipt of loan facilities and did not produce documents showing repayment or rent remittances offsetting the debt

Reasoning

The contracts (indenture of conveyance, letter of offer, mortgage and further charge) were uncontested. The plaintiffs admitted financial challenges in 2014 and did not contest receipt of funds. No payment documents were produced; the 10 units sold to third parties were not remitted to offset the loan. The debt stood at Ksh 100,033,202.83 as at 24th April 2018.

p. 6
03

Protection of third-party purchasers' interests in the charged property

Holding

The statutory power of sale must exclude the ten flats purchased by bona fide purchasers who were not served with statutory notice

Reasoning

The third parties were bona fide purchasers for value without notice of defective title with proprietary interests to be protected; they cannot be condemned unheard. They were not served with the statutory notice under Section 96(3) Land Act, whose object is that persons with an interest in the charged property have notice of the intended sale.

p. 6

Legal principles established

#
  • A Sharia Supervisory Board advisory opinion restructuring a debt is not an arbitral award under the Arbitration Act and cannot subrogate valid charge and mortgage contracts
  • A secured creditor may exercise statutory power of sale upon default and failure of redemption, subject to compliance with the Land Act and Auctioneers Rules
  • Third-party purchasers of portions of charged property who were not served with statutory notice under Section 96(3) Land Act must have their proprietary interests protected before sale

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Declaration that the plaintiffs/Applicants have not established prima facie case to warrant grant of temporary injunction to stop the sale of the suit property LR 36/11/318
  2. 2.Dismissal of the application of 18th April 2018 with costs to the Respondent
  3. 3.The Defendant may exercise statutory power of sale over the suit property 36/11/318 except the 3rd parties' interests, subject to: parties meeting within 30 days to agree on the debt due; the Defendant providing a Comprehensive Statement of Accounts; and compliance with Sections 90, 96 & 97 of the Land Act and Rule 15 of the Auctioneers Rules
  4. 4.The statutory power of sale shall exclude Flats numbers 101,201,104,202,301,304,403,303,301 & 302 purchased by 3rd Parties bona fide purchasers who were not served with statutory notice or heard
  5. 5.The interim injunction granted on 20th April 2018 and extended by Consent on 23rd April 2019 shall vacate after 30 days on the rest of the suit property save for the flats held by 3rd Parties bona fide purchasers

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Civil Procedure Rules 2010Order 8 Rule 1(1)
  • Arbitration Act 1995Sections 4(2), 12, 20, 24, 26(1)
  • Land ActSections 90, 96(3), 97
  • Auctioneers RulesRule 15
  • Auctioneers ActRule 15 (as cited in disposition)

Cases cited (15)

  • David Ngugi –vs Kenya Commercial Bank Limited
    [2015] eKLR

    Courts must uphold the sanctity of lawful commercial transactions; a party should not run from lawful obligations

  • Jopa Villas LCC vs Private Investment Corp & 2 Others
    Machakos HCCC No. 215 of 2008

    Sanctity of lawful commercial transactions (Lenaola J.)

  • Kenya Planters Cooperative Union Ltd –vs- Kenya Commercial Bank Limited & 4 others
    [2016] eKLR

    Cited for estoppel by representation

  • Esther Akinyi Odidi & 2 Others –vs- Sugar Hardware Stores Limited and Another
    [2006] eKLR

    A person must stand by his word or deed relied on by another

  • National Bank of Kenya Limited –vs- Hamida Bana & 103 others
    [2017] eKLR

    Doctrine of election; a party cannot approbate and reprobate the same instrument

  • State of Punjab & Others vs Dhanjit Singh Sandhu
    Civil Appeal No. 5698–5699 of 2009

    No party can accept and reject the same instrument

  • Rajasthan State Industrial Development and Investment Corporation and Another –vs- Diamond and Gem Development Corporation Limited and Another
    AIR 2013 SC 1241

    A party cannot blow hot and cold; acceptance of benefits estops denial of validity

  • Pius Kipchirchir Kogo –vs- Frank Kimeli Tenai
    [2018] eKLR

    Irreparable injury must be one that cannot be adequately compensated in damages

  • John Nahashon Mwangi –vs Kenya Finance Bank Limited (in liquidation)
    [2015] eKLR

    Property lawfully given as security becomes a commodity for sale

  • Nyanza Fish Processors Limited –vs- Barclays Bank of Kenya Limited
    C.A Civil Appeal No. 114 of 2009

    Charging property makes it commercial; loss compensable in damages

  • Giella vs Cassman Brown
    [1973] EA 358

    Conditions for grant of interim injunction

  • Mrao vs First American Bank of Kenya Ltd & 2 Others
    (2003) KLR 125

    Definition of prima facie case

  • Balbir Singh Sandhu & Another vs Rose Detho Anor
    [2012] eKLR

    Parties are bound by commercial agreements and must keep their bargain

  • Lawrence Mukiri vs AG & 4 Others
    [2013]

    Bona fide purchasers for value without notice have protected proprietary interests

  • Bamboo Tree Holdings vs National Bank of Kenya Ltd
    HCCC 325 of 2018

    Object of Section 96(3) Land Act notice requirement

Jurisdiction invoked
Original civil jurisdiction of the High Court over mortgage/charge dispute (Civil Procedure Rules, Order 8 Rule 1(1) amended plaint)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Abdikadir Arab Mohamud & another v First Community Bank Limited", Case Analysis (2020). . Source: 

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