The Company has asked the banking regulator to investigate that Bank’s conduct following High Court finding that administration was an “improper and collateral invocation of statutory insolvency powers”
Infinity Industrial Park Limited has formally lodged a regulatory complaint with the Central Bank of Kenya (CBK) against Bank of Baroda (Kenya) Limited, asking the banking regulator to investigate the Bank’s conduct in its dealings with the industrial park and to consider appropriate regulatory action.
The complaint, accompanied by supporting court decisions and other documentation, follows a major High Court ruling delivered on 24 September 2026 in HCCOMMIN/E132/2026 — Bank of Baroda Kenya Limited v Infinity Industrial Park Limited.
In that ruling, the High Court set aside, annulled and terminated the appointment of joint administrators over Infinity Industrial Park.
The Court declared the administration an:
“improper and collateral invocation of statutory insolvency powers”
and held that it was inconsistent with the objects and purposes of administration under the Insolvency Act.
INFINITY ASKS CBK FOR SUPERVISORY INVESTIGATION
Infinity’s complaint asks CBK, as regulator and supervisor of Kenya’s banking sector, to examine the governance, credit-management, legal-risk and regulatory issues arising from Bank of Baroda’s conduct.
Among the matters Infinity has asked CBK to examine are the circumstances leading to the appointment of administrators shortly after Bank of Baroda lost its application to set aside a subsisting default judgment; the Bank’s handling of requests for partial discharge of charged property; proposed sales of plots to identified purchasers; the Bank’s handling of restructuring and repayment proposals; and whether appropriate governance and internal legal-risk controls were followed.
Infinity has also asked CBK to consider the regulatory implications of the High Court’s findings concerning the use of insolvency powers.
The complaint does not ask CBK to determine matters reserved for the courts. Rather, Infinity has requested a regulatory and supervisory review of the conduct of Bank of Baroda as a licensed banking institution.
HIGH COURT QUESTIONED TIMING OF ADMINISTRATION
In its 24 September ruling, the High Court examined the circumstances in which the administration was commenced.
The Court noted that the administrators were appointed barely ten days after Bank of Baroda’s application to set aside the default judgment had been dismissed.
The Judge observed that nothing placed before the Court suggested that Infinity’s assets were being dissipated or that there was urgency requiring the Bank to act before the parties’ respective financial positions had been established.
After considering the disruption caused by administration against the circumstances in which the Bank acted, the Court stated:
“I am satisfied that the administration was not warranted at this time.”
The Court further held:
“This is, in my view, an improper use of the insolvency jurisdiction, and it cannot be allowed to stand.”
ADMINISTRATORS’ APPOINTMENT TERMINATED
The High Court ultimately ordered that the appointment of the joint administrators be:
“set aside, annulled, terminated and declared incapable of further implementation or reliance.”
The Court also issued a permanent prohibitory and mandatory injunction restraining further implementation of or reliance upon the impugned appointment and requiring restoration of Infinity’s property, rights, management and control.
Infinity’s directors had already resumed operational control of the industrial park on 28 August 2026 following interim court orders.
The final ruling of 24 September subsequently determined the substantive challenge to the administration and terminated the administrators’ appointment.
INFINITY RAISES PARTIAL-DISCHARGE AND PLOT-SALE CONCERNS
A significant part of Infinity’s complaint to CBK concerns its requests to Bank of Baroda for partial discharges of portions of the charged industrial park.
Infinity maintains that genuine purchasers were available to acquire plots and that such sales could have generated funds capable of reducing the Bank’s exposure.
Infinity has asked CBK to examine how those requests were not considered by Bank of Baroda, the reasons particular transactions were not facilitated, whether counter-proposals were made and whether the Bank adequately considered the potential for property sales to reduce its outstanding exposure.
These matters form part of Infinity’s complaint to CBK and have not been presented as findings already made by the regulator.
INFINITY SEEKS REVIEW OF BANK’S GOVERNANCE AND DECISION-MAKING
Infinity has requested CBK to examine the Bank’s internal decision-making surrounding the administration, including what legal and credit advice was considered, what approvals were obtained and whether the implications of the existing court proceedings were adequately considered before administrators were appointed.
The company has further requested CBK to consider whether the Bank’s conduct complied with applicable regulatory expectations concerning governance, risk management and treatment of customers.
HIGH COURT LEAVES INFINITY FREE TO PURSUE DAMAGES
The High Court also expressly granted Infinity liberty to pursue:
“damages, compensation, special damages and consequential relief arising from losses caused by the impugned appointment and acts undertaken pursuant thereto.”
Infinity says it is assessing the commercial losses allegedly arising from the administration and related disruption.
The High Court additionally ordered that the costs of the application, costs occasioned by the purported administration and reasonable restoration costs be borne by Bank of Baroda rather than from Infinity Industrial Park’s assets.
COMPLAINT NOW BEFORE BANKING REGULATOR
Infinity has delivered its complaint and supporting documentation to the Central Bank of Kenya and has requested that the regulator examine the issues raised and take such supervisory or regulatory action as it considers appropriate.
The filing of the complaint does not mean that CBK has made findings against Bank of Baroda. The allegations contained in the regulatory complaint remain matters for CBK to consider, while the findings expressly contained in the High Court ruling stand as judicial findings.
Infinity says its objective in approaching CBK is to obtain an independent regulatory examination of the conduct of a licensed banking institution following the High Court’s findings concerning the administration.
The company has indicated that it will cooperate with CBK and provide any further documentation required for the regulator’s consideration.
