Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCOtherNot stated in the judgment as provided· [2025] KEELRC 2863 (KLR)

Kadu v Kenya Ports Authority; National Bank of Kenya & another (Garnishee) (Cause E096 of 2021) [2025] KEELRC 2863 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
13 October 2025
1,036 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~4 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Employment Court froze KShs 3.375 million of a judgment debtor's bank funds, confirming garnishee orders stand once the correct decretal amount is agreed.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This is a ruling of the Employment and Labour Relations Court at Mombasa (Ocharo Kebira J) delivered virtually on 13th October 2025 on a Notice of Motion dated 8th September 2025 by the Respondent/Judgment Debtor. The Judgment Debtor sought a stay of a pending garnishee application, setting aside of all garnishee proceedings including the Garnishee Order Nisi issued on 4th August 2025 as incompetent and fatally defective, and a declaration that the decretal sum pursued did not conform to the judgment of 7th March 2025. In its submissions dated 23rd September 2025, the Judgment Debtor computed the correct decretal sum as KShs. 3,375,191.56, comprising net pay of KShs. 2,834,725.83 after PAYE, assessed costs of KShs. 349,417.16, and interest at 12% per annum for six months to 6th August 2025. The Decree Holder accepted that figure, asking only for additional interest from 6th August to 6th October 2025. Although counsel for the Judgment Debtor urged that no amount had been specified, the court found the computation explicit and adopted KShs. 3,375,191.56 plus interest accruing after 6th August 2025 as the subject matter of execution. Noting that the 2nd Garnishee had indicated sufficient funds, the court made the order nisi absolute against the 2nd Garnishee for that sum and directed that the garnishee proceedings against the 1st Respondent continue. No costs order was recorded.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the Judgment Debtor specified an amount due and payable capable of compromise

Holding

The court rejected the submission that no amount had been specified, holding that the Judgment Debtor's submissions clearly computed KShs. 3,375,191.56 as due, which the Decree Holder accepted

Reasoning

The Judgment Debtor's submissions dated 23rd September 2025 set out a detailed computation: net pay of KShs. 2,834,725.83 after PAYE, costs of KShs. 349,417.16 as assessed on 3rd July 2025, and interest at 12% per annum for six months. The Decree Holder expressly agreed to the figure, seeking only additional interest to 6th October 2025. Counsel's contrary assertion was therefore irreconcilable with the record.

p. 3
02

Disposition of the Garnishee Order Nisi

Holding

The order nisi was made absolute against the 2nd Garnishee for the agreed sum plus subsequent interest, with proceedings against the 1st Respondent continuing

Reasoning

On 18th August 2025 counsel for the 2nd Garnishee had indicated sufficient funds were available to satisfy the decree. Given the parties' agreement on the correct decretal figure, the court crystallised the order nisi into an absolute order for that sum, and allowed execution against the 1st Respondent to continue.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • Where a judgment debtor's submissions specify a concrete amount due under the decree which the decree holder accepts, that amount, plus post-acknowledgment interest, constitutes the proper subject matter of garnishee proceedings

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The Garnishee Order Nisi is made absolute against the 2nd Garnishee for the sum of KShs. 3,375,191.56 plus interest accrued after 6th August 2025 till payment in full
  2. 2.The Garnishee proceedings against the 1st Respondent shall continue
  3. 3.For purposes of garnishee proceedings or any execution, the subject matter is KShs. 3,375,191.56 plus interest accrued after 6th August 2025 till full payment
Jurisdiction invoked
Not expressly stated; supervisory and execution jurisdiction over its own decree in garnishee proceedings

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Kadu v Kenya Ports Authority; National Bank of Kenya & another (Garnishee) (Cause E096 of 2021) [2025] KEELRC 2863 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in the judgment as provided. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/2863/eng@2025-10-13

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