[2017] KEHC 9790 (KLR)
The court found that the 1st Defendant did not comply with the Court Order of 3 February 2017 within the stipulated 7 days, as the required documents were only supplied after the Court's Ruling of 6 December 2017 and in response to Summons. No explanation was provided for the delay, and the court deemed the 1st...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2017] KEHC 9790 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Bank of Africa Kenya Limited; Defendant: Put Sarajevo General Engineering Company; Defendant: Esed Becirevic; Defendant: Adnan Terzic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Suit 51 of 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Suit / Ruling on Contempt of Court Application
- Outcome
- 1st Defendant found in contempt of court and fined; Mr. James Muli discharged of obligations.
- Judges
- OA Sewe
- Legal Topics
- Contempt of Court, Compliance With Court Orders, Enforcement of Judgments
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Bank of Africa Kenya Limited
Plaintiff
Put Sarajevo General Engineering Company
Defendant
Esed Becirevic
Defendant
Adnan Terzic
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Ruling on Contempt of Court Application
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the 1st Defendant complied with the Court Order of 3 February 2017 within the stipulated time period.
- 2 Whether the 1st Defendant should be punished for contempt of court for delayed compliance.
- 3 Whether Mr. James Muli, as Finance Officer, discharged his obligations under the Summons issued.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the 1st Defendant did not comply with the Court Order of 3 February 2017 within the stipulated 7 days, as the required documents were only supplied after the Court's Ruling of 6 December 2017 and in response to Summons. No explanation was provided for the delay, and the court deemed the 1st Defendant's conduct inexcusable. Consequently, the 1st Defendant was found in contempt of court and fined Kshs. 200,000, payable within 7 days, failing which execution would issue. As for Mr. James Muli, the court held that he was not a party to the suit and, upon being summoned, complied by availing the requisite documents. The court determined that Mr. Muli had discharged his...
Court Disposition
1st Defendant found in contempt of court and fined; Mr. James Muli discharged of obligations.
Orders
- The 1st Defendant is fined Kshs. 200,000 to be paid within 7 days of the date hereof, failing which execution to issue.
- Mr. James Muli is discharged of his obligations pertaining to the Summons issued on 14 December 2017.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
18 paragraphs
REPUBLICOF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
MILIMANI LAW COURTS
COMMERCIAL & TAX DIVISION
CIVIL SUIT NO. 51 OF 2017
BANK OF AFRICA KENYA LIMITED..........................................…...PLAINTIFF
-VERSUS-
PUT SARAJEVO GENERAL ENGINEERING COMPANY....1ST DEFENDANT
ESED BECIREVIC...................................................................2ND DEFENDANT
ADNAN TERZIC.......................................................................3RD DEFENDANT
RULING
[1]This matter came up on 19 December 2017 for the 1st Defendant to show cause why it should not be punished for contempt of Court. In attendance was Mr. James Muli, the 1st Defendant's Finance Officer. He had filed an affidavit sworn by him on 14 December 2017 wherein he averred that the 1st Defendant had fully complied with the Court Order of 3 February 2017 by which the 1st Defendant was required to provide a receipt under oath of the schedules of on-going contracts showing the status of completion and outstanding payments and all payments made by the Kenya National Highway Authority and Kenya Rural Roads Authority between 1 January 2015 and 31 December 2016 within 7 days of the Order of the Court.
[2] It is noteworthy however, that the documents were only supplied after the Ruling of the Court dated 6 December 2017 and in response to the Summons issued herein for the attendance of Mr. Muli as well as the Directors of the 1st Defendant. Clearly therefore, the Order of 3 February 2017was not complied with within 7 days as was stipulated, and no reason has been proffered as to why this was the case. In my careful consideration the attitude of the 1st Defendant is inexcusable. Having found it in contempt, it is hereby fined to pay Kshs. 200,000/= within 7 days of the date hereof, failing which execution to issue.
[3] As for Mr. Muli, it is notable that he was not a party to this suit, and that on being summoned he complied and availed the requisite documents. In my view he has discharged his obligation. I note that the Plaintiff's Counsel expressed dissatisfaction with the Statements provided in so far as they are not current. However, the Order of 3 February 2017 was specific to the Period between 1 January 2015 and 31 December 2016. Moreover, it was not a requirement of the Order that the whereabouts of the money or the 1st Defendant's directors be disclosed. Thus, I would agree with Mr. Nyamodi that, in so far as Mr. James Muli is concerned, there has been compliance and Mr. Muli is accordingly discharged of his obligations pertaining to the Summons issued herein on 14 December 2017.
It is so ordered.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT NAIROBI THIS 22ND DAY OF DECEMBER 2017
OLGA SEWE
JUDGE