[2024] KEELRC 1522 (KLR)
The Court found that the Claimant was awarded Kshs. 2,085,000 in 2011, which remains unpaid after 13 years. The Respondents, directors of the 1st Respondent, placed themselves outside the jurisdiction and made no attempt to satisfy the award or appeal. The Court held that there was no justification to delay...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2024] KEELRC 1522 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: David Nelson Miseda; Respondent: Today Online Limited; Respondent: Milton Chomba Njanja; Respondent: Loise Wahu Njanja; Respondent: Standard Chartered Bank Limited
- Court
- Employment and Labour Relations Court
- Court Station
- Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Cause 704 of 2010
- Procedural Posture
- Garnishee Application / Ruling on Applications for Absolute Garnishee Order and Stay of Proceedings
- Outcome
- Claimant's application for garnishee order made absolute; Respondents' application for stay of proceedings declined.
- Judges
- J Rika
- Legal Topics
- Garnishee Proceedings, Enforcement of Awards, Stay of Proceedings, Execution of Decree
- 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
David Nelson Miseda
Applicant
Today Online Limited
Respondent
Milton Chomba Njanja
Respondent
Loise Wahu Njanja
Respondent
Standard Chartered Bank Limited
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Garnishee Application / Ruling on Applications for Absolute Garnishee Order and Stay of Proceedings
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the garnishee order nisi should be made absolute to enforce the award granted to the Claimant.
- 2 Whether proceedings should be stayed pending the hearing and determination of an intended appeal by the Respondents.
Ratio Decidendi
The Court found that the Claimant was awarded Kshs. 2,085,000 in 2011, which remains unpaid after 13 years. The Respondents, directors of the 1st Respondent, placed themselves outside the jurisdiction and made no attempt to satisfy the award or appeal. The Court held that there was no justification to delay execution further, especially as the Respondents had not engaged with the proceedings or demonstrated any intention to satisfy the decree. The garnishee order nisi was therefore made absolute to allow partial execution of the award. The Respondents' application for stay of proceedings was declined due to lack of merit and inordinate delay.
Court Disposition
Claimant's application for garnishee order made absolute; Respondents' application for stay of proceedings declined.
Orders
- The Claimant’s application dated 27th June 2023 is allowed, and order of garnishee nisi made absolute.
- The Respondents’ application dated 15th August 2023 seeking an order to stay proceedings pending an intended appeal is declined.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
37 paragraphs
Miseda v Today Online Limited & 2 others; Standard Chartered Bank Limited (Garnishee) (Cause 704 of 2010) [2024] KEELRC 1522 (KLR) (14 June 2024) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2024] KEELRC 1522 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi
Cause 704 of 2010
J Rika, J
June 14, 2024
Between
David Nelson Miseda
Claimant
and
Today Online Limited
1st Respondent
Milton Chomba Njanja
2nd Respondent
Loise Wahu Njanja
3rd Respondent
and
Standard Chartered Bank Limited
Garnishee
Ruling
1. This is an old Claim, as suggested by its registration number in the title above.
2. It was concluded through an award of the Court, dated 20th May 2011. The Claimant was awarded against the 1st Respondent, the total sum of Kshs. 2,085,000, with no order on costs and interest.
3. The amount was to be paid within 45 days of the delivery of the award, but has remained unpaid to-date, 13 years after the award.
4. On 24th May 2012, the Industrial Court, declined an application by the Claimant to attach what he thought was the 1st Respondent’s motor vehicle, finding that, ‘’ there is no evidence to show that the Judgment-Debtor has ceased to exist, and the Claimant/Decree-Holder should intensify search for and identification of the attachable assets and properties of the Judgment- Debtor. ‘’
5. The Claimant has since then, not been able to execute his decree.
6. The 2nd and 3rd Respondents are directors of the 1st Respondent, who were added to the proceedings for purposes of execution.
7. The Respondents are alleged to have placed themselves outside the jurisdiction of the Court, and it is only after the Claimant traced them to Australia, and traced some of their assets in Kenya, that a series of applications have been presented before the Court, 13 years after the dispute was determined.
8. Two applications come up for ruling today. The first is dated 27th June 2023 filed by the Claimant, seeking that order nisi issued on 5th October 2022, is made absolute.
9. The second application is dated 15th August 2023, filed by the Respondents, asking the Court to stay its proceedings, pending hearing and determination of an intended appeal.
10. The Garnishee is only involved in the first application.
11. The Parties filed affidavits, in respect of their positions on both applications. They also rely on submissions, confirmed to have been filed and served, at the last mention before the Court, on 24th November 2023.
The Court Finds: - 12. The Court has no reason to decline the prayer sought by the Claimant, that the garnishee order nisi issued on 15th October 2022, is made absolute.
13. The Respondents have not satisfied the Court that its proceedings, which commenced in the year 2010, and ended in an award made in favour of the Claimant 13 years ago, in 2011, should be stayed pending any intended appeal.
14. The decree has been pending satisfaction for 13 years. The Respondents ceased operations in Kenya, placed themselves outside the jurisdiction of the Court, and have not made any attempt to satisfy the award or appeal against the award for 13 years. They did not respond to the Claim, when it was filed, heard and concluded years back. They flew out to Australia. The Court has no reason to delay partial execution, which garnishee proceedings are intended to achieve.
It Is Ordered: - 15. ....a.The Claimant’s application dated 27th June 2023 is allowed, and order of garnishee nisi, made absolute.b.The Respondents’ application dated 15th August 2023 seeking an order to stay proceedings pending an intended appeal, is declined.c.Costs to the Claimant on both applications.
DATED, SIGNED AND RELEASED TO THE PARTIES ELECTRONICALLY AT NAIROBI, UNDER PRACTICE DIRECTION 6[2] OF THE ELECTRONIC CASE MANAGEMENT PRACTICE DIRECTIONS, 2020, THIS 14TH DAY OF JUNE 2024. JAMES RIKAJUDGE