[2014] KEHC 4164 (KLR)

[2014] KEHC 4164 (KLR)

The court found that there was no court order issued on 6th December, 2012, thus the application for contempt could not be sustained. Furthermore, the respondent, being a limited liability company, is not a natural person and therefore cannot be committed to civil jail. The court was not convinced by the reasons...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2014] KEHC 4164 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Al-Taj Audin Alibhai; Respondent: Jiwani Impex Limited
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Mombasa
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Miscellaneous Application 200 of 2012
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Two Applications: Contempt of Court and Setting Aside Orders
Outcome
Both applications dismissed with no order as to costs.
Judges
SN Mukunya
Legal Topics
Contempt of Court, Setting Aside Orders, Enforcement of Court Orders
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Contempt of Court Setting Aside Orders Enforcement of Court Orders

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Al-Taj Audin Alibhai

Applicant

Jiwani Impex Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Two Applications: Contempt of Court and Setting Aside Orders

  1. 1 Whether the respondent should be committed to civil jail for alleged disobedience of a court order dated 6th December, 2012.
  2. 2 Whether the ruling and order made on 23rd November, 2012 should be set aside and the respondent ordered to remove movables from the suit premises.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that there was no court order issued on 6th December, 2012, thus the application for contempt could not be sustained. Furthermore, the respondent, being a limited liability company, is not a natural person and therefore cannot be committed to civil jail. The court was not convinced by the reasons advanced for setting aside the orders of 23rd November, 2012, and found no basis to grant the request for removal of movables from the suit premises. Consequently, both applications were dismissed.

Court Disposition

Both applications dismissed with no order as to costs.

Orders

  • The application dated 29th November, 2013 for committal to civil jail is dismissed.
  • The application dated 31st May, 2013 to set aside the orders of 23rd November, 2012 and for removal of movables is dismissed.