Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCPartially AllowedNot stated in the judgment extract· [2019] KEELRC 1225 (KLR)

Samwel Chege Njogu v Easy Coach [2019] KEELRC 1225 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
26 June 2019
HWHellen Wasilwa
1,173 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~5 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan employment court released an attached company bus because the owner agreed to deposit the full judgment amount in a joint account pending appeal.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Respondent filed a notice of motion seeking injunctions compelling the release of its attached staff bus, Motor Vehicle Mitsubishi KBK 960D, together with a wheel spanner and jerk, restraining the Claimant and Icon Auctioneers from selling, disposing of or alienating it, and nullifying the warrants of attachment as fraudulently and unprocedurally obtained, pending an intended appeal against a judgment of Kshs 200,727.46 plus taxed costs of Kshs 128,636. The Respondent alleged it was never served with the proclamation notice or warrants of attachment and only discovered the attachment when its vehicle was seized. The Claimant, in a replying affidavit and submissions, maintained that the warrants were obtained procedurally, that the auctioneers proclaimed the goods on 21 March 2019, and that the applicant had not proved fraud. The Respondent relied on section 23(b) of the Auctioneers Act and rule 12(1)(b) and (c) of the Auctioneer Rules, submitting the auctioneers failed to serve the required notices, and relied on Article 50(1) of the Constitution. Wasilwa J observed that the purpose of the attachment was to realize the decree and that the Respondent's offer to deposit the entire decretal sum plus costs in a joint account secured the Claimant's interest. The court accordingly allowed the application, ordered release of the motor vehicle, directed deposit of the decretal sum plus costs in a joint interest-earning account within 7 days, placed auctioneers costs on the Respondent, and ordered that costs of the application abide the appeal.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the attachment of Motor Vehicle KBK 960D was carried out fraudulently and unprocedurally

Holding

The court did not pronounce on the alleged fraud, finding instead that deposit of the decretal sum would secure the Claimant's interest and allowed the application on that basis

Reasoning

The court considered the averments of both parties, noting the purpose of the attachment was to realize the decretal sum of Kshs 200,727.46 plus costs of Kshs 128,638. The Respondent offered to deposit the full decretal sum plus taxed costs pending appeal. The court reasoned that this offer secured the Claimant's interest in case of any eventuality and therefore allowed the application, directing release of the motor vehicle upon deposit in a joint interest-earning account within 7 days.

p. 2
02

Whether the attached motor vehicle should be released pending the intended appeal

Holding

Yes, on condition the Respondent deposits the entire decretal sum plus costs in a joint interest-earning account within 7 days

Reasoning

The Respondent indicated willingness to deposit the entire decretal sum and taxed costs in court or a joint account pending appeal. The court held that such deposit secured the Claimant's interest, so the application was allowed and the motor vehicle ordered released. Auctioneers costs, if any, were borne by the Respondent and the application costs were to abide the outcome of the appeal.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • An applicant for release of attached property pending appeal who offers to deposit the decretal sum plus taxed costs secures the decree-holder's interest and may have the attached property released.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The Claimant/Respondent to release the attached motor vehicle KBK 960D to the Respondent/Applicant
  2. 2.The Respondent to deposit the entire decretal sum plus costs in a joint interest-earning account held in the joint names of Counsel on record within 7 days
  3. 3.Auctioneers costs if any to be borne by the Respondent
  4. 4.Costs of the application to abide the outcome of the Appeal

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Auctioneers ActSection 23(b)
  • Auctioneer RulesRule 12(1)(b) & (c)
  • Constitution of Kenya, 2010Article 50(1)
Jurisdiction invoked
First-instance employment and labour relations court; the application itself references an intended appeal by the Respondent against this Court's judgment, but no appellate jurisdiction is invoked

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Samwel Chege Njogu v Easy Coach [2019] KEELRC 1225 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2019). Not stated in the judgment extract. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2019/1225/eng@2019-06-26

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.