Capital Markets Authority v Citbank NA Kenya Branch (Miscellaneous Case E659 of 2024) [2025] KEMC 215 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Magistrates' Court allowed the Capital Markets Authority to investigate a Citibank account tied to its Limuru Tea PLC probe.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the court should grant a warrant to investigate a bank account and ancillary orders for electronic-evidence certification in aid of the Capital Markets Authority's investigations
The application was merited and allowed as prayed; the court found no prejudice would be caused and the orders were within the powers conferred on the Applicant by Parliament.
The Applicant, the capital markets regulator, was investigating Limuru Tea PLC, a listed company within its regulatory supervision, for financial management, impropriety and governance lapses. Preliminary findings flagged funds settled into an account held by the Respondent. The Applicant issued summons for information which the Respondent declined to answer absent a court order. The Respondent, though represented, did not oppose the application. Section 13A(3)(b) of the Capital Markets Act empowered the court to grant the orders, and no prejudice would result.
Legal principles established
#- A company publicly listed on the Nairobi Securities Exchange falls under the regulatory supervision of the Capital Markets Authority.
- Section 13A(3)(b) of the Capital Markets Act confers on the court power to make investigation orders such as a warrant to investigate a bank account in aid of the regulator's statutory investigative mandate.
Court orders
#- 1.A warrant to investigate a bank account to enable the Applicant and/or an officer of relevant rank to access, investigate, inspect, obtain, be supplied with, carry away as exhibits or seize certified copies of account opening documents, RTGS transactions and account statements for the period 1st January 2016 to 31st December 2021 in respect of bank account number 100536439 held in the name of Unilever Tea Kenya Limited at Citibank N.A Kenya
- 2.An order compelling the Manager, Citibank NA Kenya to nominate authorized person(s) to make and give a certificate of production of electronic evidence under section 106B(4) of the Evidence Act in respect of certified copies generated electronically that shall be given in compliance with the warrant
- 3.The order to be served upon the Manager, Citibank NA Kenya
- 4.No orders as to costs of the Application
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Section 13A(3)(b) of the Capital Markets Act CAP 485A
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Capital Markets Authority v Citbank NA Kenya Branch (Miscellaneous Case E659 of 2024) [2025] KEMC 215 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in the judgment (Notice of Motion dated 15th April 2024). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kemc/2025/215/eng@2025-01-21
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.