Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
Court of AppealAllowedCivil Application E889 of 2025

NCBA Bank Kenya PLC v Official Receiver & Administrator, Multiple Hauliers (EA) Limited (Under Administration) & another

Court of Appeal
19 December 2025
WKW. KaranjaLAL. A. AchodeAMA. O. Muchelule
2,201 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~9 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Court of Appeal paused a High Court decision that suspended NCBA's chosen administrators for Multiple Hauliers, freezing the entire insolvency case until the appeal is heard.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
NCBA Bank Kenya PLC, a principal creditor of Multiple Hauliers EA Limited (indebted in excess of Ksh.12 billion), applied under Rule 5(2)(b) of the Court of Appeal Rules for a stay of a High Court ruling of 2nd October 2025 by which the court, on a mention date and without any pending application or hearing of parties, purported to clarify earlier interim orders and suspend the appointment of two replacement administrators. NCBA argued the ruling was a nullity since no substantive orders can issue at a mention, and that with the Official Receiver's appointment already stayed by the Court of Appeal, the company was left with no administrator, exposing secured creditors to loss as the Directors resumed control. The respondents countered that the ruling was merely directions, that the appeal was against non-appealable interim orders, and that substituting a neutral court-appointed administrator with a single creditor's nominees would compromise the administration. Applying the settled Stanley Kinyanjui v Tony Ketter principles, the Court found one arguable point: whether the High Court had jurisdiction to deliver a substantive ruling in the absence of an application and on a mention date. On the nugatory limb, it agreed that no administrator was in place to preserve the company's assets and accounts and that the applicant would likely suffer irreversibly if the appeal ultimately succeeded. The Court allowed the motion, stayed the orders of 2nd October 2025, and stayed further proceedings in HCCC Insolvency Cause No. E022 of 2021 pending the intended appeal, with costs to abide the appeal's outcome.

Questions the Court framed

#

The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.

  1. 1.Whether the intended appeal has at least one arguable point
  2. 2.Whether, if stay is not granted, the intended appeal will be rendered nugatory

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the High Court had jurisdiction to deliver a substantive ruling and suspend appointed replacement administrators in the absence of an application and on a mention date

Holding

This is an arguable point deserving of the Court's consideration, justifying stay.

Reasoning

The applicant complained that the ruling of 2nd October 2025 was delivered on a mention date without any application pending and without hearing the parties, rendering it a nullity. The Court found this raised a jurisdictional question fit for consideration on the intended appeal, satisfying the first limb of the Rule 5(2)(b) test.

p. 4
02

Whether the intended appeal would be rendered nugatory if stay is not granted

Holding

Yes - as things stand there is no administrator in place to preserve the company's assets and accounts, and the applicant is likely to suffer irreversibly.

Reasoning

The Court agreed with the applicant that with the Official Receiver's appointment stayed and the replacement administrators suspended, no administrator exists to preserve the assets and accounts of the company, and the Directors may deplete asset value without supervision, causing irreversible loss if the appeal later succeeds.

p. 4

Legal principles established

#
  • Rule 5(2)(b) empowers the Court of Appeal to preserve the subject matter of an appeal pending its determination; a stay requires at least one arguable point and a nugatory aspect.
  • An arguable appeal need not be one that will succeed, only one deserving of the Court's consideration.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Stay of the orders issued on 2nd October 2025 by the learned Judge until the intended appeal is heard and determined
  2. 2.Stay of proceedings in HCCC Insolvency Cause No. E022 of 2021 until the intended appeal, the subject of this ruling, is heard and determined
  3. 3.Costs of the application to abide the outcome of the appeal

The bench

#

One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.

WK
majority
LA
majority
AM
majority
On appeal from
High Court at Nairobi
HCCC Insolvency Cause No. E022 of 2021
Jurisdiction invoked
Rule 5(2)(b) of the Court of Appeal Rules

Quotable passages

#

Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.

We allow the notice of motion dated 24th October 2025, and order stay of the orders issued on 2nd October 2025 by the learned Judge, we also issue an order of stay of proceedings in HCCC Insolvency Cause No E022 of 2021 until the intended appeal, the subject of this ruling is heard and determined.
p. 4Final orders - stay granted
A stay will only be granted if the applicant is able to show that the appeal or intended appeal has at least one arguable point.
p. 4Rule 5(2)(b) principles
An arguable appeal is not necessarily one that will succeed, but simply one that is deserving of the Court’s consideration.
p. 4Meaning of arguable appeal
Costs of the application shall abide the outcome of the appeal.
p. 4Costs

Issues in the judgment

#
minor

Date inconsistency: the notice of motion is dated 24th October 2024 although it challenges a ruling of 2nd October 2025.

minor

The 2nd respondent referred to interim orders of 23rd September 2025 while the impugned ruling is dated 2nd October 2025.

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "NCBA Bank Kenya PLC v Official Receiver & Administrator, Multiple Hauliers (EA) Limited (Under Administration) & another", Case Analysis (2025). Civil Application E889 of 2025. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2025/2317/eng@2025-12-19

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