ANERLISA MUIGAI ORDERED TO PAY BEN KANGANGI 2M FOR DEFAMATION

6,450 views

Businesswoman and socialite Anerlisa Muigai has been instructed by the High court to pay Ben Kangangi KSh 2 million for defamation.

This marks the end of Ben Kangangi’s March 2018 court case against Anerlisa.

The verdict was issued by Judge Chitembwe ruled in favour of Mr Kangangi who had filed the suit against Anerlisa seeking (general damages, damages for loss of reputation, exemplary damages, a written apology and a permanent injunction) over a post she made on her Facebook and Instagram pages about him.

The court noted that Anerlisa failed to prove her allegations and ruled in favor of the businessman.

Anerlisa

The beginning

In a post seen on her social media platforms in 2018, Anerlisa said that Kangangi approached her asking for Sh 20million for a tender he had secured with the government to supply electrical cables.

She said she could only raise Sh 7million but had to borrow Sh 13million. Anerlisa said Ben told her he knew a financier and in less than a week she had been given the whole amount without any security.

The lender demanded that Anerlisa give one of her cars as security, and she obliged. She added that Ben delayed paying her back and Dennis (the financier) was also demanding to be paid. She said that Ben did not answer her phone calls when she tried to reach out.

Ben Kangangi

She continued to say that Kangangi and the lender were acquaintances trying to defraud her. Kangangi eventually paid her KSh 5 million, and her car was returned, but the lender allegedly continued hounding her. A few months later Dennis told her to withdraw the case.

Ben testified that he is a businessman dealing in imports and sale of high-end automobiles, equipment, fashion apparel and interior design material through a company called Benka Automobiles. And that he lost significant business opportunities after the post.

Justice Juma Chitembwe said that based on the evidence presented, a global award of Sh 2million was adequate compensation for the plaintiff since his character was negatively affected.

Given the evidence on record, it is this courts view that it (the post) was indeed defamatory. The post directly referred to the plaintiff(Mr. Kangangi) and indicated that he was an unscrupulous businessman who conducted fraudulent businesses and could not be trusted.

The plaintiff indicated that the claims by the defendant( Anerlisa) were false and the defendant did not provide anything to controvert the same.” Ruled the judge.

2 million bob is not a lot of money for Anerlisa, right?

By Wanjiru Mbaru

3.5 2 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You cannot copy content of this page