SheriaNet for Android — search and read Kenyan case law from your phone, offline.
Join the beta →

Republic v Receiver Manager, Imperial Bank Limited (In Receivership) Exparte Atul R. Shah [2019] KEHC 10909 (KLR)

[2019] KEHC 10909 (KLR) High Court of Kenya
Read PDF
Court
High Court of Kenya
Case number
10909
Citation
[2019] KEHC 10909 (KLR)
Decided
17 January 2019
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeJudicial ReviewPostureEx parte application for orders of MandamusCoramAmool
Holding

The ex parte applicant has not established grounds for the court to grant the orders of Mandamus sought.

Facts

Atul R. Shah is a fixed deposit accounts holder with Imperial Bank Limited (In Receivership). He seeks orders compelling the Receiver Manager to make payments from the sums held in his fixed accounts.

Issues

  1. whether the ex parte applicant has established any grounds for this court to grant the orders of Mandamus sought
  2. whether the Respondent's refusal to pay the ex parte applicant is ultra vires its statutory mandate

Reasoning

The ex parte applicant's advocates argued that the Respondent acted ultra vires section 50 of the Kenya Deposit Insurance Act by refusing to pay the ex parte applicant, who was a guarantor for an overdraft facility. The Respondent's counsel argued that Mandamus lies when officials have a public duty to perform.

Outcome

The ex parte applicant's application for orders of Mandamus was dismissed.

Authorities cited

Legislation (4)
  • Act No. 10 of 2012
  • Cap 22, Laws of Kenya
  • Fair Administrative Action Act
  • Kenya Deposit Insurance Act
Cases cited (8)
  • Kolaba Enterprises Limited v Shanshudin Hussein Varvani & Another
  • Republic v Attorney General & Another ex parte Ongata Works Limited
  • Walsh v Lonsdale
  • Kenya National Examinations Council vs R ex parte Geoffrey Gathenji Njoroge & 9 Others
  • W. G. & C. Byse, Administrative & Review Law, Cases and comments 119-20
  • Wilbur vs. United States ex rel. Kadrie
  • 1993 Can LII 3004 (F.C.A.)
  • 2003 FCT 211 (CanLII)
Experimental AI summary generated by a language model, not a lawyer. It may contain errors or omissions and must not be relied on for legal decisions — the full judgment below is the authoritative source.
Full judgment 0.2 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case