Three Ways Shipping Services (K) Limited and Others v Transpares (K) Limited (Miscellaneous Application No. 1526 of 2025)
Observed later treatment
No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.
Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains good law.
AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions—always read the source judgment before relying on it.
Holding
The court dismissed the application to set aside a Garnishee Order Nisi issued in execution of a judgment debt. The court held that garnishee proceedings cannot be used to relitigate the merits of a decree or ruling underpinning execution. Where a decree or order remains in force, execution founded thereon is lawful unless overturned on appeal or review. The court found compelling evidence that the applicant companies constituted a single unified enterprise operating under multiple names, justifying the earlier lifting of the corporate veil. The court declined to grant interim orders staying execution absent a pending application for substantive stay.
Outcome
Application dismissed; execution proceedings to continue
Facts
The respondent obtained judgment in default against the 1st applicant (a Kenyan company) in Civil Suit No. 279 of 2019 for USD 126,000. In execution, the respondent successfully applied to lift the corporate veil of the 1st applicant under Miscellaneous Application No. 837 of 2023, making the 2nd, 3rd and 4th applicants (directors and related company) jointly and severally liable for the debt. The respondent obtained a Garnishee Order Nisi in Miscellaneous Application No. 1353 of 2025 attaching bank accounts of the 4th applicant held with Stanbic Bank and Standard Chartered Bank. The applicants filed this application to set aside the garnishee order, arguing that the 2nd-4th applicants were never parties to the original suit and that the ruling lifting the corporate veil was erroneous. The applicants also sought interim orders staying execution and enlargement of time to file a review application, claiming their former counsel failed to act on instructions.
Issues
- Whether the Garnishee Order Nisi issued in Miscellaneous Application No. 1353 of 2025 arising out of Miscellaneous Application 837 of 2023 and arising out of Civil Suit No. 279 of 2019 should be set aside.
- Whether an interim order stopping the execution of the orders resulting from Miscellaneous Application No. 1353 of 2025 should be granted until the final determination of Miscellaneous Application 1499 of 2025 and 1500 of 2025.
- Whether the time within which to file an application for review should be enlarged.
Orders
- Application dismissed.
- Costs awarded to the respondent.
- File remitted to the Registrar to conclude the execution proceedings.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (7)
Cases cited (7)
- Visare U Ltd v Grant Thornton Management Ltd (Miscellaneous Application No. 384 of 2024)
- Brown v Dean [1910] AC 373
- Salomon v Salomon & Co Ltd [1897] AC 22
- Littlewoods Mail Order Stores Ltd v Inland Revenue Commissioners [1969] 1 WLR 1241
- ABSA Bank of Uganda Limited v Enjoy (U) Ltd (Miscellaneous Application No. 1243 of 2023)
- E.A. Industries v Trufoods [1972] EA 420
- American Cyanamid v Ethicon [1975] AC 396
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.