Paramount Bank Limited v Hassan Naqvi Syed Ul Qamar [2020] eKLR Case Summary

Court
High Court of Kenya at Mombasa
Category
Civil
Judge(s)
D. O. Chepkwony
Judgment Date
March 11, 2020
Country
Kenya
Document Type
PDF
Number of Pages
3
Explore the case summary of Paramount Bank Limited v Hassan Naqvi Syed Ul Qamar [2020] eKLR, detailing key legal principles and outcomes in this significant decision.


Case Brief: Paramount Bank Limited v Hassan Naqvi Syed Ul Qamar [2020] eKLR

1. Case Information:
- Name of the Case: Paramount Bank Limited v. Hassan Naqvi Syed Ul Qamar
- Case Number: Civil Appeal No. 160 of 2017
- Court: High Court of Kenya at Mombasa
- Date Delivered: March 11, 2020
- Category of Law: Civil
- Judge(s): D. O. Chepkwony
- Country: Kenya

2. Questions Presented:
The court must resolve the following central legal issues:
1. Whether the suit was premature given the procedural requirements under the Credit Reference Bureau Regulations, 2013.
2. Whether the Respondent proved the tort of defamation against the Appellant.

3. Facts of the Case:
The Respondent, Hassan Naqvi Syed Ul Qamar, filed a suit against the Appellant, Paramount Bank Limited, seeking damages for libel, an injunction, an apology, a confirmation of loan clearance, and costs of the suit. The Respondent claimed that the Appellant maliciously reported erroneous information to the Credit Reference Bureau (CRB), portraying him as uncreditworthy, which damaged his reputation and caused him distress. The Appellant denied the allegations, asserting that the Respondent had outstanding debts and that the information submitted was accurate.

4. Procedural History:
The trial court found in favor of the Respondent on August 17, 2017, ruling that the Appellant was liable for defamation due to the submission of incorrect information to the CRB. The Appellant appealed this decision, arguing that the Respondent had not followed the necessary procedures outlined in the Credit Reference Bureau Regulations, 2013, and that the tort of defamation had not been proven. The appeal was heard on October 28, 2019, with written submissions filed by both parties.

5. Analysis:
- Rules: The court considered the Credit Reference Bureau Regulations, 2013, particularly Regulation 35, which outlines the procedures for correcting erroneous credit reports. It also referenced Regulation 50, which mandates institutions to provide accurate information to the Bureau.

- Case Law: The court cited previous rulings, including *Selle & Anor v. Associate Motor Boat Co. Ltd* (1968), which established that a first appellate court must re-evaluate evidence. Additionally, it referenced *Jamii Bora Bank Limited v. Joash Ondieki Gisore* (2019), which clarified that the Credit Reference Bureau Regulations do not provide remedies for defamation, and therefore, the Respondent's suit was not premature.

- Application: The court found that the Respondent had not received adequate remedies under the regulations, thus justifying his suit. It determined that the Appellant had indeed submitted inaccurate information to the CRB, which led to the Respondent being denied credit. The court concluded that the Appellant acted with malice, particularly in light of prior assurances that the Respondent's loans were cleared.

6. Conclusion:
The court dismissed the Appellant's appeal, affirming the trial court's ruling that the Respondent proved his case of defamation. The decision underscores the responsibility of financial institutions to provide accurate information to credit bureaus and the potential legal consequences of failing to do so.

7. Dissent:
There were no dissenting opinions noted in the case.

8. Summary:
The High Court of Kenya upheld the trial court's ruling that Paramount Bank Limited was liable for defamation due to the submission of inaccurate information to the Credit Reference Bureau, which harmed the Respondent's reputation and creditworthiness. The case highlights the importance of accuracy in credit reporting and the legal obligations of financial institutions to their clients. The appeal was dismissed with costs awarded to the Respondent.

Document Summary

Below is the summary preview of this document.

  • Paramount-Bank-Limited-v-Hassan-Naqvi-Syed-Ul-Qamar-[2020]-eKLR-Case-Summary_1190_0.jpg

This is the end of the summary preview.

Related Documents

View all summaries