Cape Holdings Limited and two other petitioners have moved to the High Court seeking an urgent hearing of a constitutional petition challenging the computation and enforcement of a court decree that they say has grown to more than Sh10.6 billion, largely due to compound interest.
In documents filed before the court on June 23, 2026, Cape Holdings Limited, together with Vinay Bipinchandra Sanghrajka and Bipinchandra Bhaichand Sanghrajka, argue that the amount being enforced has reached unconstitutional levels and continues to increase due to the continued accrual of compound interest.
The petition is directed against Synergy Industrial Credit Limited and the Attorney General.
At the centre of the dispute is a decree issued on March 25, 2021, arising from the enforcement of an arbitral award dated January 30, 2015.
According to the court filings, the arbitral award required Cape Holdings to pay Sh1.66 billion together with compound interest at 18 per cent per annum until payment in full.
The petitioners say the amount had grown to Sh10,678,959,601.49 as of March 2026.
They are asking the Constitutional and Human Rights Division to prioritise the hearing of the matter, arguing that the decretal sum continues to increase each day.
“The matter is of extreme urgency and begs to be heard on a priority basis because the Decretal Sum is not static. It continues to compound at 18% per annum,” the application states.
According to the petitioners, one of the central constitutional questions is whether interest can continue accruing during a period when the underlying arbitral award had previously been set aside by the High Court.
Court documents state that after years of litigation, the High Court initially set aside the arbitral award before the Court of Appeal reinstated and enforced it on November 6, 2020.
The petitioners contend that interest continued to accrue during the period when the arbitral award had been set aside by the High Court.
Among the questions placed before the court is “whether interest can constitutionally accrue during a period when the underlying obligation had been annulled by a court of competent jurisdiction.”
The petition also challenges Section 44A(4) of the Banking Act, raising questions over whether judgment debtors should receive protection under the in duplum principle, which generally limits excessive interest accumulation in certain lending situations.
In the application, the petitioners argue that enforcement of the amount in its current form has moved beyond the company and now affects private property associated with individuals connected to the matter.
The court filings state that enforcement measures have extended to property situated on Bendera Lane in Spring Valley, Nairobi.
The petitioners further argue that the continued growth of the amount has implications for constitutional rights, including the rights to property, dignity and equal protection of the law.
“Every passing day, therefore, increases the disputed figure, deepens the constitutional injury, and further entrenches the unconstitutionality of the present and untamed escalation of the computation of the Decretal Sum,” the application states.
They have asked the court to certify the matter as urgent, allocate an expedited mention date and set accelerated timelines for responses and submissions.
Justice Patricia Nyaundi directed that the documents be served, with the matter scheduled for directions on June 29, 2026.
