[2017] KEELRC 681 (KLR)

[2017] KEELRC 681 (KLR)

The court found that the attached household items were personal property of the objector, Virginia Wangui Mathenge, and not part of the estate of the 1st respondent, Mathenge and Muchemi Advocates, against whom judgment had been entered. There was no evidence to demonstrate that the items formed part of the estate...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2017] KEELRC 681 (KLR)
Parties
Claimant: Lucy Nyandia Mwangi; Respondent: Mathenge and Muchemi Advocates; Respondent: Virginia Wangui Mathenge
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Court Station
Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Cause 811 of 2012
Procedural Posture
Employment Cause / Ruling on Objection to Attachment
Outcome
objection upheld; attachment set aside
Legal Topics
Attachment of Property, Judgment Execution, Administrator Liability
Source Language
en
Employment and Labour Attachment of Property Judgment Execution Administrator Liability

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lucy Nyandia Mwangi

Claimant

Mathenge and Muchemi Advocates

Respondent

Virginia Wangui Mathenge

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Cause / Ruling on Objection to Attachment

  1. 1 Whether the attached household items belong to the judgment debtor or to the objector personally.
  2. 2 Whether the objector, as administrator of the deceased, is liable for the judgment against the 1st respondent.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the attached household items were personal property of the objector, Virginia Wangui Mathenge, and not part of the estate of the 1st respondent, Mathenge and Muchemi Advocates, against whom judgment had been entered. There was no evidence to demonstrate that the items formed part of the estate of the deceased advocate or the 1st respondent. As such, the attachment was improper and the objection was upheld. The attachment was set aside and costs were ordered to follow the outcome.

Court Disposition

objection upheld; attachment set aside

Orders

  • The objection is upheld.
  • The attachment of household items is set aside.