The Cytonn Investments defamation case against two respondents has been thrown out by a Kenyan court. To recap, the two respondents in the case were Mr. Chris Orwa, and the Kenyan financial research firm, Mwango Capital. Mr. Orwa had uploaded a video on his YouTube which Mwango Capital shared with their audience on X. Mwango Capital put a link to the YouTube episode and the caption was a quote from Chris Orwa.
Chris Orwa is one of the many Kenyans who are still seeking answers on whether money put into Cytonn two funds will be refunded. In the episode, he alleges his investment of what he terms as ” my hard-earned saving for 6 years, KES 1Millon” was lost. Mwango shared the video on its X account.
These actions led to Mr. Dande filing a lawsuit at the Milimani courts on the 26th of July. The CEO deemed statements made by Mr. Orwa as defamatory. In addition, he claimed that Mwango Capital was equally culpable for spreading the message to its large social media audience on X. “The video is defamatory, should come down otherwise we shall take appropriate steps.” wrote the Cytonn CEO in response to a post by Mwango.
Social Media Handle Can’t Be Sued
Principal Magistrate B.M Cheloti found that the defamation suit lacked merit. Further, the court found the respondents were within their rights to comment on a matter of public interest.
“I am of the opinion that the posting and/or publication made by the Defendants/Respondents amounted to fair comment as the same were not made out of malice to either cause embarrassment or injure the reputation of the Plaintiff “. Wrote Honourable Cheloti in his ruling.
This dismissal is another blow for Cytonn Investments as the court dismissed the suit at a cost. This means the plaintiff must pay the necessary costs incurred by the respondents i.e. the trouble and expense that parties went to defending and succeeding in their defence. It is worth noting that Mwango Capital had crowdfunded its legal fees, ultimately raising KES 69,546 against a target of KES 100,000.
The magistrate noted that there was a need to establish whether the 2nd “Respondent is a limited liability company or a social media handle without any legal capacity to sue or be sued. Due to this, the court dismissed the case against Mr Orwa at no cost.
