Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Original judgment

Halake Rambo Muthoga & 2 others v Greenstar Systems Limited

REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI CIVIL DIVISION HIGH COURT CIVIL MISC. APPL NO. 519 OF 2016 HALAKE RAMBO MUTHOGA........................APPLICANT/ADVOCATE & MUIRURI ADVOCATES VERSUS GREENSTAR SYSTEMS LIMITED..................RESPONDENT/CLIENT RULING 1. The Application dated 12th March, 2019 seeks the following orders: (a) That the Honourable Court be pleased to grant leave for the Applicants application to lift the corporate veil of Greenstar Systems Limited, the Respondent herein. (b) That this Honourable Court be pleased to shift the corporate powers of Greenstar systems Limited as a legal personality to its Directors. (c) That this Honourable Court be pleased to direct the Directors of Greenstar Systems Limited to pay the judgment debt of Ksh.2,493,521.75(principal sun plus 23 months’ interest) along with costs and interest from the date of the issuance of the orders herein until payment in full. (d) That the costs of this application be provided for. 2. It is stated in the affidavit in support that the Respondent is indebted to the Applicant in the sum of Ksh.2,493,521.75 pursuant to an order and Decree of this court dated 31st May, 2019. That the Garnishee proceedings commenced herein did not bear any fruits, hence, the application at hand. 3. The application was not opposed. No papers were filed in reply to the same. Though served, the Respondent did not turn up on the day the application proceeded to hearing. The application proceeded exparte. 4. I have considered the application and I allow the same as prayed. Costs to the Applicant. Dated, signed and delivered at Nairobi this 17th day of Oct., 2019 B. THURANIRA JADEN JUDGE

A note on accuracy. These pages are generated automatically from our AI-written case briefs and have not been checked by a lawyer. Case titles and citations come from Kenya Law; the counts, topics, propositions and “treatment” labels are derived from the briefs and can be incomplete or wrong. Use them as a research aid and always read the original judgment before relying on anything here. This is not legal advice.