RULING
I have heard and considered the submissions of Learned Counsel for the parties. It is not in dispute that there was an award which was adopted by this court. It is also not disputed that the Judgment Debtor has not complied with the terms of that award. Moreover, there is already a Decree Nisi in place. All the Decree Holder seeks is that it be made absolute so that it can enjoy the fruits of its judgment. It is a tenet of the law that justice should not be delayed and clearly what the Judgment Debtor is doing is applying delaying tactics. Last time it was that the Amended Decree had not been signed but now that is done, it raises the issue of a settlement meeting to which it has invited the Decree Holder. I do not see how making the Decree absolute will stop the parties having a meeting should they wish to do so. The interest of this court is for parties to have a just, fair and expeditious end to this case as provided in Sections 1A and 1B of the Civil Procedure Act and Article 159 of the Constitution. In the premises the decree is made absolute. The Judgement Debtor shall bear the Garnishee’s costs.
Orders accordingly.