Wakhungu v Milembe Investment Plc & another
Wakhungu v Milembe Investment Plc & another [2025] KEHC 8746 (KLR)
The High Court found that the appellant's application under Order 22 Rule 35 was properly brought, as the decree remained unsatisfied and the appellant was entitled to seek information regarding the judgment debtor's assets. The magistrate erred by dismissing the application without substantive analysis, thereby frustrating the appellant's right to execution and access to justice. However, the court held that the appellant did not provide sufficient evidence to justify piercing the corporate veil at this stage, as Kenyan law requires clear proof of fraud or misuse of the corporate form, which…
Source excerpt
- Execution Of Decrees
- Corporate Veil Piercing
- Oral Examination Of Directors
- Judgment Enforcement
- Recusal Of Judicial Officer