Exhaustion Doctrine Won't Save Banks: A Customer Can Sue the Bank Directly for Unlawful CRB Listing
Bank of Africa Kenya Ltd v Miano KEHC 13565 - Judgment by Sergon J, 17th Sept 2026, Nakuru
This one matters to everyone with a loan, a salary check-off, or an M-Shwari limit. It’s not just about one borrower. It’s about how banks treat your name.
SUMMARY
Francis Miano took a Kshs. 780,000 loan from Bank of Africa, repayable over 72 months through his employer. The Bank said his employer was late in remitting, so his account was in arrears. It reported him to Metropol CRB.
Miano’s version: He was paying via salary. Without warning, the Bank closed his original account, opened a new one- Account No. 0008049720055, and used THAT new account to blacklist him. No call. No letter. No notice.
He only discovered it when Unaitas Sacco rejected his loan application. He sued in Nakuru CM Court No. 598 of 2018. He won. Kshs. 200,000 damages. The Bank appealed.
On 17th September 2026, the High Court dismissed the Bank’s appeal entirely.
WHY THIS JUDGMENT IS A BIG DEAL
For years banks have hidden behind two excuses:
1. “We are required by law to report you under Section 31 Banking Act."
2. “Go complain to Metropol, not us."
Sergon J has dismantled both.
LESSONS FOR BANKS & RIGHTS FOR CUSTOMERS
1. The right to report you is not absolute. It is conditional.
Yes, banks can and must share credit information under the Banking Act and Regulation 18 & 50. But Regulation 25(1) is clear: You must be given 30 days NOTICE before negative information is sent. Regulation 25(8): You must be told AFTER it is sent. The Court called these rules "not ornamental." Bank of Africa could not produce any notice- no date, no content, no proof of service. That alone killed its case.
2. Arrears ≠ Accuracy.
The Bank kept saying "but he was in arrears." The Court said: That’s not the question. The question is, was the information you sent ACCURATE? You listed him on an account he says he never knew existed. You never linked that second account to his original facility. If you claim accuracy, prove it.
3. You cannot outsource blame to Metropol.
Metropol is a separate company, true. But the Court said Metropol only processed what the Bank supplied. The sin was committed when the Bank pressed "send." The Bank answers for what it supplies.
4. You don’t have to beg the CRB first before suing your bank.
The Bank argued Miano should have used the CRB dispute process under Reg 20 & 35. The Court: That process is for disputing what the Bureau holds. It does NOT shield a bank that breached its own duty. Miano had already complained to the Bank. The Bank said "we will investigate" and did nothing. He was entitled to go to court.
5. Your credit reputation has value, even if you can’t prove you lost land.
The trial court rejected his claim that he lost a land deal because he didn’t prove it. But it still gave him Kshs. 200,000 for injury to his credit standing, embarrassment, and distress. The High Court upheld it as within range. Message: You don’t need a title deed to prove your name was damaged.
THE BOTTOM LINE FOR THE PUBLIC
If you have ever checked your phone and found you are blacklisted, this case is your shield.
A bank must:
a) Tell you before it lists you
b) Tell you after it lists you
c) Prove the debt is yours and the figure is accurate
d) Keep proof of that notice
If it doesn’t, the listing is unlawful ab initio- void from the start, and you can get damages.
THE BOTTOM LINE FOR ADVOCATES & BANKERS
Stop pleading "statutory duty" without pleading compliance with Regulation 25. The Court wants to see: Date of notice, mode of service, contents. And stop hiding behind Reg 20 exhaustion. Where the complaint is about the bank’s own furnishing of data, a direct suit lies.
Also, Section 31(5) Banking Act protection is qualified immunity - good faith + accuracy + proper purpose. No notice + unexplained second account = no good faith.
Appeal dismissed
Greetings Colleagues,
Let's Celebrate One of Our Own Today!
Today, 22nd September, our own Martha Wangari Karua, SC, turns 69, the last year of her 60s, as she beautifully put it.
I am not sure if SC is in this group, but whether she is here or not, she is FIDA in spirit and in history. Magistrate at 24, Human Rights monitor, LSK awardee, Minister for Justice, MP for Gichugu for 20 years, 2013 presidential candidate, 2022 running mate, now leader of PLP, but before all titles, she was a woman lawyer who refused to be told to sit down.
She walked the path many of us are still walking- young mother in the magistracy, fighting for women's rights under a dictatorship, resigning on principle in 2009 because conscience matters more than office.
She posted yesterday a throwback in her afro and Glucolin t-shirt, remembering those early years and thanking grace for carrying her. That grace has carried many of us too.
Can we take a moment today to celebrate her?
A word of prayer, a message on her timeline, a memory of how she inspired you?
Happy 69th birthday to the Iron Lady with a soft heart. Kirinyaga's daughter, FIDA's pride, Kenya's conscience, to date standing with the advocates for the Rule of Law.
Let’s convey our collective love to her by leaving a message on her timeline or sharing how she impacted us in our professional lives.
*#MarthaAt69*
Ekaterina Handa
🚨 HAVE WE JUST KILLED HABEAS CORPUS IN KENYA? 🚨
Court: "If Abductors Cover Their Faces, Habeas Corpus Will NOT Help You"
Case: Dika & 2 others v IG Police & 3 others KEHC 13502 - Nyaundi J (17 Sept 2026)
SUMMARY:
On 23rd May 2024, two men - Hassan Maalim Ali and Ahmed Ibrahim Wako - were blocked near Mlango Kubwa, Nairobi, by 4 plain-clothed men in a grey double-cab KCV 015F. Handcuffed. Driven off. No arrest, no booking. Family reported at Pangani OB/23/05/24. Police said "we don't know them". DCI took statements and went silent. Two years later, they are still missing.
Family went to High Court for Habeas Corpus - "Produce the bodies, tell us where they are."
On 17th Sept 2026, Court dismissed everything.
COURT'S REASONS:
1. You did not prove police are holding them.
Disappearance is not proof of custody. Handcuffs, plain-clothes, double-cab is only suspicion, not evidence under Sections 107-109 Evidence Act.
2. Habeas corpus is not a tracing tool.
It can only be used if you already know who has the person. It cannot be used to FIND who abducted them.
3. DPP struck out.
You cannot force DPP to order investigations.
Result: No production, no disclosure, no compensation. Each party bears own costs.
WHY THIS JUDGMENT IS DANGEROUS:
This judgment gives a blueprint for extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances:
1. It Rewards Masking and Plain-Clothes Operations:
The court says if abductors cover faces, use civilian number plates (KCV), and don't book at OB, then Habeas Corpus fails. What police unit will ever book an abduction at OB again? The more professional you hide, the more you are protected by this judgment.
2. It Makes Proof Impossible for Poor Families:
How does a mother in Eastleigh prove KCV 015F belongs to DCI? NTSA records are controlled by State. CCTV is controlled by State. Safaricom data needs a court order. Yet court demands the family provide that link BEFORE State is forced to explain. This is asking the victim to investigate the State.
3. It Reverses 30 Years of Human Rights Jurisprudence:
From Koigi Wamwere to Matheri, our courts held that once a person disappears after last being seen with State agents, burden shifts to State to explain. This court says "No prima facie case until you prove custody." This is back to Nyayo era.
4. Direct Link to Extrajudicial Killings:
If habeas corpus is dead, what is the next step? Families cannot get production order. Police have no duty to disclose. The subject remains missing for months. By the time an inquest is done, the body is at City Mortuary as "unknown" or in River Yala. This judgment closes the URGENT door (habeas corpus) and tells families to go to the SLOW door (investigations & inquests), where evidence dies.
PRACTICAL TAKEAWAYS FOR ADVOCATES:
If you have a disappearance case tomorrow, you will lose on this precedent unless you:
a) Do NOT file habeas corpus alone. Add prayers for mandamus to compel IG to investigate under Art 244, and for preservation of CCTV/NTSA/Safaricom data.
b) Attach NTSA search, private investigator affidavit linking KCV to State, OB certified copies showing refusal to investigate.
c) Plead with precision: Name Article 29(a)(c)(d) - freedom from arbitrary detention, 25(a) - freedom from torture, 26 - right to life, not just "Bill of Rights violated".
d) Do not join DPP unless you can prove file reached him.
We must appeal this or distinguish it urgently. Otherwise we have told every plain-clothed squad: Just cover your face, and the High Court will not ask you where the body is.
Thoughts? Has anyone filed a similar matter after this?
#HabeasCorpus #EnforcedDisappearance #RuleOfLaw_
Ekaterina Handa
Partner
Gitonga, Kinyanjui & Co. Advocates