Kioni v Standard Media Group Ltd & 11 others (Civil Case 100 of 2013) [2025] KEHC 13738 (KLR) (Civ) (30 September 2025) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2025] KEHC 13738 (KLR) REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT NAIROBI (MILIMANI LAW COURTS) CIVIL CIVIL CASE 100 OF 2013 SIFUNA NIXON, J SEPTEMBER 30, 2025 BETWEEN JEREMIAH NG'AYU KIONI ....................................................... DECREE HOLDER AND STANDARD MEDIA GROUP LTD ................................ 1ST JUDGMENT DEBTOR JUMA KWAYERA ............................................................ 2ND JUDGMENT DEBTOR RADIO AFRICA GROUP ............................................... 3RD JUDGMENT DEBTOR MAINA KAGENI .............................................................. 4TH JUDGMENT DEBTOR DANIEL NDAMBUKI ...................................................... 5TH JUDGMENT DEBTOR ROYAL MEDIA SERVICES LTD ..................................... 6TH JUDGMENT DEBTOR SWALEH MDOE ............................................................... 7TH JUDGMENT DEBTOR MEDIAMAX NETWORK LTD ...................................... 8TH JUDGMENT DEBTOR ALPHONCE OLADIPO ................................................... 9TH JUDGMENT DEBTOR BUNI LTD ....................................................................... 10TH JUDGMENT DEBTOR NATION MEDIA GROUP ............................................ 11TH JUDGMENT DEBTOR MOSES NGURE .............................................................. 12TH JUDGMENT DEBTOR https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2025/13738/eng@2025-09-30 1
page 1 of 2
RULING 1. This ruling is on the Application dated 2nd April 2024. By it, the Judgment-Debtor has sought to set aside the Warrants of Attachment and Sale, as well as the consequent Proclamation dated 26th March 2025. 2. The ordinary order is that Judgment-Creditor should first tax his costs (Party and Party costs) before he can embark on execution. The proviso to that however, is provided in Section 94 of the Civil Procedure Act (Cap 21 Laws of Kenya). That a decree-holder desiring to execute the decree before costs are ascertained (before taxation), must first seek the leave of Court. 3. This route is an exception rather than the norm, and the Court will before granting such leave, have to be satisfied that there exist exceptional circumstances or good cause. The leave must be specifically sought by a formal Application, and specifically granted. Leave can neither be dispensed with, presumed nor inferred. There has to be a specific order granting the leave in clear terms. 4. In the case of this suit, the Decree-holder has embarked on executing the decree before costs are ascertained and without taxation of a bill of costs. This is against the norm. It is irregular, amounts to extra-judicial execution of a decree. 5. Having found that the execution is improper, the warrants of attachment herein are for setting aside. I hereby set them aside and lift the proclamation. Having done so, I see no need in determining the second limb of the Application; which is on whether the Decree herein is more than a year old. 6. As costs follow the event, the Decree-Holder shall bear the costs of this Application, as well as the auctioneer’s charges. DATED AND DELIVERED AT NAIROBI ON THIS 30TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2025. PROF (DR) NIXON SIFUNA JUDGE https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2025/13738/eng@2025-09-30 2
page 2 of 2