Edward Lenjo Musamuli v Amesnet Enterprises Limited [2012] KECA 171 (KLR)
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Case number
- 171
- Citation
- [2012] KECA 171 (KLR)
- Decided
- 16 March 2012
AI Summary
Beta
Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypecivilPostureAppeal from a High Court rulingCoramE. M. Githinji, M. K. Koom, D. K. Maraga
Holding
The order for conditional attachment was erroneous and the appellant's right to defend the suit was not taken away by the default clause.
Facts
The respondent filed a suit against the appellant for a liquidated claim of KShs.4,350,000, alleging the appellant owed a 5% selling commission and KShs.100,000 mobilization fees. The appellant denied liability and filed a statement of defence.
Issues
- whether the order requiring the appellant to furnish security was well-founded
- whether the default clause allowing the respondent to obtain summary judgment took away the appellant's right to defend the suit
Reasoning
The respondent failed to show that the appellant was about to dispose of or remove property with intent to obstruct or delay the execution of a decree. The property sold was the one that gave rise to the respondent's claim, and the respondent did not satisfy the pre-requisites for granting an order of conditional attachment.
Outcome
Affirmed
Orders
- Affirmed
Authorities cited
Legislation (2)
- Civil Procedure Rules
- Civil Procedure Act
Cases cited (1)
- Ndirangu v Aballa (1984) KLR 746
Experimental AI summary generated by a language model, not a lawyer. It may contain errors or omissions and must not be relied on for legal decisions — the full judgment below is the authoritative source.
Loading judgment…