The Milimani Commercial Magistrate Court in Nairobi has delivered judgment in a high-profile defamation case pitting Cytonn Investments Management PLC against Caroline Wanjiku Mbugua, whom the firm accused of publishing damaging statements across social media platforms and national television.

According to court filings, Cytonn sought general, punitive, aggravated, and exemplary damages, alleging that Ms Mbugua made defamatory claims insinuating the company had refused to refund her matured investment, causing her “frustration, depression, and suicidal thoughts.”

The investment firm also demanded specific damages amounting to Kshs 3,266,990.69, which it said represented lost profits linked to major withdrawals by investors.

In addition, Cytonn asked the court to issue a permanent injunction stopping the defendant or her associates from issuing any further statements about the company and to compel her to publish a public apology across all her social media platforms.

Also Read: Phoebe Okowa Elected to International Court of Justice by UN Security Council

Social Media Posts and TV Remarks Examined

Court documents show that the defendant operated the Facebook account “Carol Mbugua” and Twitter account “Caroline Wanjiku M.”

Cytonn alleged that on March 8th, 2022, she posted claims that she had invested all her money with the firm, but the company had allegedly “refused to refund her funds upon maturity.”

The court heard that Ms Mbugua repeatedly made similar posts between March and April 2022, and even wrote to the then-President Uhuru Kenyatta, urging him to intervene.

The plaintiff argued that she tagged media houses, government institutions, and international figures, an action Cytonn said was calculated to attract widespread public scrutiny and ridicule.

The firm further claimed that Ms Mbugua appeared on KTN News on 28 June 2021, where she allegedly implied in Swahili that Cytonn “collects money and refuses to release it,” statements the company interpreted as portraying it as fraudulent and deceitful.

Court Rejects Injunction and Aggravated Damages

In its judgment, the court noted that aggravated or exemplary damages would only be justified where clear evidence of malice exceeded the defamatory act itself.

Citing Nzibo v Nation Media Group, the magistrate ruled that although the defendant’s conduct was unlawful, the threshold for aggravated damages was not met.

On the prayer for a permanent injunction and public apology, the court relied on principles from Tipper v Rosborg, stating that such remedies should only be granted where ongoing or future publication is likely.

The judge observed that the posts in question were years old and that issuing an injunction would “revive something wrong forgotten.”

Also Read: Court Hands Death Sentence to Man for Attacking and Robbing Former MP’s Mother

General Damages Awarded at Kshs 2.5 Million

While dismissing punitive and special damages, the magistrate held that Cytonn, being a corporate investment manager, relies heavily on public trust, making injury to its reputation particularly significant.

The court stated that the defendant’s wide dissemination of the posts, across social media, letters to the presidency, and national TV, intensified the reputational harm.

Drawing from comparable awards in Gitau v Mbuqua, Mboya v Business Today Media, and Oduol v Nation Media Group, the court settled on Kshs 2,500,000 as appropriate compensation.

The court ruled that Cytonn’s defamation claim succeeded partly and awarded half the costs of the suit.

A 30-day stay of execution was also granted. The judgment was delivered, dated, and signed in Nairobi on 31 October 2025.

Follow our WhatsApp Channel and WhatsApp Community for instant news updates

Cytonn Investments Managing Limited Managing Partner and Chief Executive Officer, Edwin Dande. FILE PHOTO | DIANA NGILA | NMG