[2022] KEHC 15820 (KLR)

[2022] KEHC 15820 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant had complied with the previous order to initiate the process of opening a joint account for deposit of the decretal sum, as evidenced by correspondence seeking cooperation from the respondent's advocates. The respondent's failure to cooperate frustrated the process, and thus the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2022] KEHC 15820 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: South Nyanza Teachers Savings & Credit Co-operative Society Ltd; Respondent: Maseno University
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Homa Bay
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Appeal E105 of 2021
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Post Judgment Application Regarding Execution and Attachment
Outcome
Application allowed. Attachment declared illegal. Goods to be released to applicant. Costs to applicant.
Judges
KW Kiarie
Legal Topics
Execution of Decrees, Attachment of Property, Compliance With Court Orders, Stay of Execution
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Execution of Decrees Attachment of Property Compliance With Court Orders Stay of Execution

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

South Nyanza Teachers Savings & Credit Co-operative Society Ltd

Appellant

Maseno University

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Ruling on Post Judgment Application Regarding Execution and Attachment

  1. 1 Whether the attachment of the applicant's property by the respondent was lawful.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant complied with the court's previous orders regarding deposit of decretal sums.
  3. 3 Whether the respondent frustrated the process of opening a joint account as ordered by the court.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant had complied with the previous order to initiate the process of opening a joint account for deposit of the decretal sum, as evidenced by correspondence seeking cooperation from the respondent's advocates. The respondent's failure to cooperate frustrated the process, and thus the applicant could not be faulted for non-compliance. Consequently, the subsequent attachment of the applicant's property was unlawful, as it was based on erroneous records and executed without proper authority or procedure. The court held that the respondent's conduct undermined the integrity of the judicial process and ordered the unconditional release of the attached goods to the...

Court Disposition

Application allowed. Attachment declared illegal. Goods to be released to applicant. Costs to applicant.

Orders

  • The attached goods are to be released unconditionally to the applicant.
  • Costs of this application awarded to the applicant.