[2012] KEHC 1247 (KLR)

[2012] KEHC 1247 (KLR)

The court found that the plaintiff had established a prima facie case for the grant of security for costs and attachment before judgment. The application was unopposed, and the plaintiff's fears of dissipation of assets by the 1st defendant were well-founded, given the evidence of fraud, misappropriation, and...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2012] KEHC 1247 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Dataguard Distributors Limited; Defendant: Virginia Njeri Kigo; Defendant: Valz Distributors; Defendant: Vidi Fabricators Limited; Defendant: Nairobi Tyre Mart Company Limited
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Suit 641 of 2012
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Ruling on Interlocutory Application for Security for Costs and Attachment Before Judgment
Outcome
Application allowed.
Judges
DO Ogembo
Legal Topics
Security for Costs, Attachment Before Judgment, Fraud by Employee, Misappropriation of Funds, Interlocutory Injunctions
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Security for Costs Attachment Before Judgment Fraud by Employee Misappropriation of Funds Interlocutory Injunctions

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dataguard Distributors Limited

Plaintiff

Virginia Njeri Kigo

Defendant

Valz Distributors

Defendant

Vidi Fabricators Limited

Defendant

Nairobi Tyre Mart Company Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Suit / Ruling on Interlocutory Application for Security for Costs and Attachment Before Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff has established a prima facie case for the grant of security for costs against the 1st defendant.
  2. 2 Whether the court should order attachment before judgment of the 1st defendant's properties to secure the plaintiff's claim.
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff has satisfied the principles for grant of interlocutory relief as set out in Giella v Cassman Brown.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiff had established a prima facie case for the grant of security for costs and attachment before judgment. The application was unopposed, and the plaintiff's fears of dissipation of assets by the 1st defendant were well-founded, given the evidence of fraud, misappropriation, and ongoing disposal of property. The court was satisfied that the requirements under Order 39 of the Civil Procedure Rules and the principles in Giella v Cassman Brown had been met. Consequently, the court ordered the 1st defendant to furnish security in the sum of Kshs.43,000,000 within seven days, failing which the specified properties would be attached before judgment to secure the...

Court Disposition

Application allowed.

Orders

  • The 1st defendant shall furnish security in the sum of Kshs.43,000,000 within seven days of this ruling.
  • In default of furnishing security, attachment before judgment is ordered in respect of the properties listed in the application.