Background and introduction
1. The Applicant moved this Court by way of an application dated 22nd December 2025, seekiZng injunctive relief. Pursuant to the Orders of this Court issued on 23rd December 2025, conditional injunctive relief was granted, subject to the Applicant depositing a sum of Kshs. 50,000,000/= and furnishing a bank guarantee of an equivalent amount to the Respondent within thirty (30) days.
2. It is not in dispute that the Applicant has not complied with the said conditions. Instead, he filed a subsequent application dated 22nd February 2026, seeking a review of the Orders of 23rd December 2025. I have considered the application, together with the oral submissions advanced by learned counsel Mr. Mugo for the Applicants and Mr. Opole for the Respondents.
Analysis and Determination
3. The non-compliance with the Orders of 23rd December 2025 is admitted. The Applicant’s explanation is that the festive season made it difficult to procure the requisite bank guarantee within the stipulated period. While the Court is prepared to acknowledge that the festive season may have posed logistical challenges, it is noteworthy that nearly sixty (60) days have elapsed since the issuance of the Orders. The Applicant has not provided any explanation for the delay beyond the festive period, nor has he tendered evidence of any attempt to comply.
4. No documentation has been produced to demonstrate that the Applicant applied for the bank guarantee, encountered obstacles in the process, or made any progress towards compliance. Similarly, with respect to the deposit of Kshs. 50,000,000/=, the Applicant has failed to show any effort to secure or remit even a portion of the sum ordered.
5. The absence of demonstrable effort or partial compliance undermines the Applicant’s claim of good faith. Moreover, the timing of the present application, filed on the eve of the scheduled auction, further points to mala fides.
Disposition
6. In light of the foregoing, the Court finds no merit in the application dated 22nd February 2026. The same is hereby dismissed. Consequently, the injunctive orders issued on 23rd December 2025 lapsed by effluxion of time.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED IN NAIROBI
THIS 26th DAY OF FEBRUARY 2026.
F. MUGAMBI
JUDGE
In the presence of:
Mr Mugo for the applicant
Mr Opole for the respondents
Court Assistant: KLilian
1. The Applicant moved this Court by way of an application dated 22nd December 2025, seekiZng injunctive relief. Pursuant to the Orders of this Court issued on 23rd December 2025, conditional injunctive relief was granted, subject to the Applicant depositing a sum of Kshs. 50,000,000/= and furnishing a bank guarantee of an equivalent amount to the Respondent within thirty (30) days.
2. It is not in dispute that the Applicant has not complied with the said conditions. Instead, he filed a subsequent application dated 22nd February 2026, seeking a review of the Orders of 23rd December 2025. I have considered the application, together with the oral submissions advanced by learned counsel Mr. Mugo for the Applicants and Mr. Opole for the Respondents.
Analysis and Determination
3. The non-compliance with the Orders of 23rd December 2025 is admitted. The Applicant’s explanation is that the festive season made it difficult to procure the requisite bank guarantee within the stipulated period. While the Court is prepared to acknowledge that the festive season may have posed logistical challenges, it is noteworthy that nearly sixty (60) days have elapsed since the issuance of the Orders. The Applicant has not provided any explanation for the delay beyond the festive period, nor has he tendered evidence of any attempt to comply.
4. No documentation has been produced to demonstrate that the Applicant applied for the bank guarantee, encountered obstacles in the process, or made any progress towards compliance. Similarly, with respect to the deposit of Kshs. 50,000,000/=, the Applicant has failed to show any effort to secure or remit even a portion of the sum ordered.
5. The absence of demonstrable effort or partial compliance undermines the Applicant’s claim of good faith. Moreover, the timing of the present application, filed on the eve of the scheduled auction, further points to mala fides.
Disposition
6. In light of the foregoing, the Court finds no merit in the application dated 22nd February 2026. The same is hereby dismissed. Consequently, the injunctive orders issued on 23rd December 2025 lapsed by effluxion of time.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED IN NAIROBI
THIS 26th DAY OF FEBRUARY 2026.
F. MUGAMBI
JUDGE
In the presence of:
Mr Mugo for the applicant
Mr Opole for the respondents
Court Assistant: KLilian