Promitto’s Sh168m claim against Amana Capital hits Tribunal dead end

Promitto’s Sh168m claim against Amana Capital hits Tribunal dead end
The firm, through its director James Benson Kagoni, claimed it invested over Sh62 million and USD 122,710 (about Sh15.9 million) in an Amana Capital investment product structured in partnership with Trade Sense Limited.

NAIROBI, Kenya, Aug 19 — Real estate company Promitto Limited has suffered a major setback in its bid to recover millions of shillings invested in Amana Capital, after the Capital Markets Tribunal struck out its case for lack of jurisdiction.

The firm, through its director James Benson Kagoni, claimed it invested over Sh62 million and USD 122,710 (about Sh15.9 million) in an Amana Capital investment product structured in partnership with Trade Sense Limited.

Promitto alleged the funds were meant to yield monthly returns of 20 percent but instead resulted in huge losses, which it blamed on negligence by the respondents.

When attempts to withdraw its principal balances failed, the firm demanded USD 1.3 million (about Sh168 million) from Amana Capital and Trade Sense in August 2024.

Promitto later lodged a complaint with the Capital Markets Authority (CMA), accusing the two licensed entities of breaching the law and posing a “phenomenal danger to public interest.”

However, the tribunal ruled that the case had been filed prematurely.

“Only CMA can properly resolve the Applicant’s complaint at the first instance under the Capital Markets Act, and then this tribunal can thereafter be properly seized of the dispute on appeal,” the panel ruled.

Promitto had also sought orders compelling CMA to investigate and suspend the licenses of Amana and Trade Sense. But both CMA and Amana opposed the application, arguing that the regulator was still within the legally provided 120 days to address the complaint.

The tribunal agreed, dismissing Promitto’s motions and upholding Amana’s objection. It further ruled that the Capital Markets Tribunal Rules of 2002 remain valid, despite Promitto’s claim that they had lapsed under the Statutory Instruments Act.

“The applicant lodged the application when the 1st Respondent was still actively handling the subject matter of the complaints,” the tribunal observed.

The ruling marks the latest twist in ongoing disputes surrounding Amana Capital, which has faced a series of complaints from investors over alleged mismanagement of funds in recent years.