[2012] KEHC 5488 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant had obtained a valid decree against the City Council of Nairobi, that the respondents had been notified of the judgment and requested to pay but failed to do so, and that execution against the respondents was not possible. In such circumstances, the law allows the court to issue an...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2012] KEHC 5488 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Mau Technical Agencies Limited; Respondent: City Council of Nairobi; Respondent: Town Clerk, City Council of Nairobi
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Application 265 of 2011
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Judgment
- Outcome
- application allowed
- Judges
- CC Kipkorir
- Legal Topics
- Mandamus Orders, Enforcement of Decrees, Judicial Review
- 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
Mau Technical Agencies Limited
Applicant
City Council of Nairobi
Respondent
Town Clerk, City Council of Nairobi
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether an order of mandamus should issue to compel the respondents to pay the decretal sum awarded in CMCC No. 8054 of 2008.
- 2 Whether the respondents have failed or refused to satisfy the decree issued in favour of the applicant.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant had obtained a valid decree against the City Council of Nairobi, that the respondents had been notified of the judgment and requested to pay but failed to do so, and that execution against the respondents was not possible. In such circumstances, the law allows the court to issue an order of mandamus to compel the satisfaction of the decree. The absence of opposition from the respondents further supported the applicant's case. The court concluded that the applicant was entitled to the order of mandamus as prayed, compelling the respondents to pay the decretal sum and costs.
Court Disposition
application allowed
Orders
- An order of mandamus is issued compelling the City Council of Nairobi and the Town Clerk, City Council of Nairobi to pay the applicant Kshs.864,177.70 together with costs of Kshs.57,432.00 being the decretal sum in Milimani CMCC No. 8054 of 2008.
- The ex-parte applicant shall have the costs of this application.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
24 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT
AT NAIROBI
MILIMANI LAW COURTS
Miscellaneous Application 265 of 2011
IN THE MATTER OF THE LAW REFORM ACT
AND
IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER OF MANDAMUS
AND
IN THE MATTER OF ENFORCEMENT OF DECREE IN CMCC MILIMANI CIVIL SUIT NO.8054 OF 2008
BETWEEN
REPUBLIC .............................................................................APPLICANT
VERSUS
CITY COUNCIL OF NAIROBI....................................1ST RESPONDENT
TOWN CLERK, CITY COUNCIL OF NAIROBI.......2ND RESPONDENT
EXPARTE
MAU TECHNICAL AGENCIES LIMITED
JUDGEMENT
By way of a notice of motion dated 5th December, 2011 Mau Technical Agencies Limited (the ex-parte applicant) prays for an order of mandamus to issue compelling the City Council of Nairobi (the 1st respondent) and the Town Clerk, City Council of Nairobi (the 2nd respondent) “to pay the applicant a sum of Kshs.864,177. 70 together with costs of Kshs.57,432. 00 being the decretal sum in Milimani CMCC No. 8054 of 2008. ”The ex-parte applicant also prays for the costs of the application. The application is supported by the grounds on the face of the chamber summons for leave dated 26th September, 2011, a statutory statement dated 26th September, 2011 and a verifying affidavit sworn on 30th September, 2011 by James Mwangi the Managing Director of the ex-parte applicant company.
The evidence placed before the court shows that the ex-parte applicant herein was the plaintiff in Nairobi Milimani Commercial Court CMCC No. 8054 of 2008 and the 1st respondent herein i.e. the City Council of Nairobi was the defendant in that case. Judgment was entered in favour of the ex-parte applicant and a decree drawn on 10th August, 2011. There is evidence that through a letter dated 2nd August, 2011 the 1st respondent’s advocates were notified of the judgement and asked for a cheque in settlement of the judgment. The letter was not responded to.
As matters stand, the application is not opposed. The ex-parte applicant has demonstrated that it obtained a decree against the 1st respondent but the decree cannot be executed and the respondents have refused to satisfy the decree. This is one case that cries for an order of mandamus. The application is therefore allowed as prayed and the ex-parte applicant will have the costs of the application.
Dated and signed at Nairobi this 23rd day of March, 2012
W. K. KORIR
JUDGE