E-Malt.com News article: Kenya: Heineken appeals US$1.78M interest award in Kenya distribution dispute with Maxam Ltd

Dutch brewing giant Heineken has filed a fresh appeal in Kenya’s Court of Appeal seeking to overturn a Kes 230 million (US$1.78 million) interest award attached to a Kes 1.47 billion (US$11.4 million) damages judgment in favour of distributor Maxam Ltd, a company associated with Kenyan businessman Ngugi Kiuna, Food Business Middle East & Africa reported on June 5.

The dispute centres on whether interest can be added to a damages award after the conclusion of court proceedings when it was neither pleaded nor granted in the original judgments.

The Court of Appeal has acknowledged that the issue raises a legitimate legal question and has granted Heineken a conditional stay of execution on the full Sh1.7 billion (US$13.2 million) payout pending determination of the appeal.

As part of the order, the brewer must provide a bank guarantee of Sh250 million (US$1.94 million) within 30 days. Failure to do so will automatically lift the stay and allow lower court proceedings relating to payment to continue.

The case dates back to January 2016 when Heineken East Africa Import Company Ltd and Heineken International B.V. terminated a distributorship agreement signed in May 2013 with Maxam Ltd and two affiliated companies.

Under the arrangement, Maxam distributed Heineken lager beer in Kenya, while related firms Modern Lane Ltd and Olepasu Ltd handled distribution in Uganda and Tanzania respectively.

Following the termination, Maxam filed suit, arguing that it had invested heavily in warehousing, logistics and distribution infrastructure in anticipation of a long-term commercial relationship.

The company maintained that the termination caused significant financial losses and undermined its business operations.

Represented by lawyer Philip Nyachoti, Maxam argued that Heineken terminated the agreements on flimsy, selfish and malicious grounds and sought to replace the distributor with new market entrants under more favourable commercial terms.

The dispute moved through Kenya’s judicial system, with the High Court ruling in favour of Maxam. The Court of Appeal upheld the judgment in 2024, and the Supreme Court subsequently affirmed the compensation award.

After the principal dispute was resolved, the parties returned to the High Court to address legal costs. During those proceedings, Maxam sought the inclusion of interest on the damages award.

Heineken opposed the application, arguing that interest had not been requested during the original trial and was not included in any previous judgment.

In November last year, the High Court dismissed Heineken’s objections and allowed the interest claim, prompting the current appeal.

The Court of Appeal’s three-judge bench stated that the question of whether interest may be introduced after judgment where it was neither pleaded nor awarded is an arguable issue warranting further examination.

The court therefore granted the conditional stay pending a final determination of the appeal.


05 June, 2026