REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
MILIMANI LAW COURTS
COMMERCIAL AND TAX DIVISION
MISC/E443/2022
HOWARD & NICK
VERSUS
CHINA QINGJIAN INTERNATIONAL GROUP (KENYA) LIMITED
RULING
[1] Before me are two applications. The Application for contempt dated 10th July 2026. And the Application for review dated 17th July. 2026
Application for contempt dated 10th July 2026
[2] The decree holder seeks: -
1. THAT this Application be certified as urgent and service thereof upon the Respondents be dispensed with in the first instance.
2. THAT the 1st and 2nd Contemnors being the Managing Director/ Chief Executive Officer & the Head of Legal Services/Company Secretary of Kenya Commercial Bank Kenya Limited, the 3rd Garnishee herein, be cited for contempt of court for deliberately failing to pay the Decree Holder/ Applicant Kenya Shillings Three Million, Six Hundred and Sixty-Five Thousand, Four Hundred and Eighty-Four and Thirty-Five Cents (Kshs. 3,665,484.35/=) less Kenya Shillings Fifteen Thousand (Kshs. 15,000/=) due as per the Garnishee Order absolute issued by this Honorable Court on 2nd July 2026.
3. THAT this Honorable Court be pleased to issue an order committing the 1st and 2nd Contemnors being the Managing Director/ Chief Executive Officer & the Head of Legal Services/Company Secretary of Kenya Commercial Bank Kenya Limited, the 3rd Garnishee herein to civil jail for a period not exceeding six (6) months on account of the flagrant, deliberate and willful breach of the Garnishee Order Absolute issued by this Honorable Court on 2nd July 2026.
4. THAT the warrants of arrest and committal to civil jail be executed by the Officer Commanding Station, Central Police Station or through any other officer in a position to execute the said warrants as may ultimately be designated by this Honorable Court.
5. THAT additionally, this Honorable be pleased to issue an order imposing a fine/ penalty payable directly by Kenya Commercial Bank Kenya Limited, the 3rd Garnishee herein to the Decree Holder/Applicant herein as punitive damages for the continuous and deliberate frustration of the execution process.
6. THAT the costs of and incidental to this Application be borne by the 3rd Garnishee (Kenya Commercial Bank Kenya Limited) on a full indemnity basis.
Grounds for the application
[3] In support thereof, the following grounds were stated: -
a. THAT on 2nd July 2026, this Honorable Court issued a Garnishee Order Absolute upon funds held in Bank Account: Kenya Commercial Bank Kenya Limited, Moi. Avenue Branch Nairobi: A/C Number: 1130723704, the 3rd Garnishee herein and any other account (s) or securities so held by the Judgment Debtor with the 3rd Garnishee, and that the said sums be paid to the Decree Holder in satisfaction of the decretal sum of Kenya Shillings Three Million, Six Hundred and Sixty Five Thousand, Four Hundred and Eighty Four and Thirty Five Cents (Kshs. 3,665,484.35/=) less Kenya Shillings Fifteen Thousand (Kshs. 15,000/=) being the cost of the Garnishee and the same be attached upon it and held to answer the order passed against the Judgment Debtor.
b. Vide a Replying Affidavit sworn on 6th May 2026 by Wambugu Joseph Mwangi, the Corporate Manager, Corporate Services Department at the 3rd Garnishee's Moi Avenue Branch, the 3rd Garnishee expressly confirmed "locking and/or holding in lien a sum total of Kenya Shillings Three Million, Five Hundred and Eighty-Nine Thousand, Nine Hundred and Sixty and Fifty-Eight Cents (Kshs. 3,589,960.58/=). The 3rd Garnishee also confirmed its "readiness and willingness to release the attached sum, upon issuance and subsequent service of a Garnishee Order Absolute."
c. Despite prior knowledge of the existing debt, making a commitment under oath to affect the said payment upon service of a garnishee order absolute, receipt of service and knowledge of the Garnishee Order Absolute dated 2nd July 2026, the 3rd Garnishee has since reversed their stance and showed defiance by deliberately failing, refusing, neglecting and/or omitting to honor the Garnishee Order Absolute in wanton disregard and contempt of court process.
d. The Decree Holder has stumbled upon embarrassing, audacious and daring evidence to demonstrate that the 3rd Garnishee's officers have yielded to the authority of the Judgment Debtor's Advocates and the 2nd Garnishee's Assistant Director, Legal Services, Peter O. Bosire rather than the authority of this Honorable Court in a determined and concerted effort aimed at defeating, frustrating & circumventing the Garnishee Order absolute issued on 2nd July 2026 by deliberately & maliciously "halting the payments" in a bid to subvert this Court's execution process.
e. The Garnishee Order Absolute issued on 2nd July 2026 has neither been set aside, discharged, reviewed nor has there been any order issued by any court to stay the execution thereof. The 3rd Garnishee is therefore deliberately and willingly acting in criminal obstruction of justice and in utter contempt of explicit court orders.
f. The 3rd Garnishee's conduct is mala fides, constitutes corporate recalcitrance and deliberate, flagrant and wilful collusion in breaching the Garnishee Order Absolute dated 2nd July 2026 thereby subjecting the authority and dignity of this Court to severe disrepute.
g. Unless this Honorable Court intervenes and invokes its jurisdiction to curb contempt, the 3rd Garnishee will continue acting in wilful and deliberate breach of the Garnishee Order Absolute issued on 2nd July 2026 and succeed in colluding with the Judgment Debtor and the 2nd Garnishee in subverting court process and rendering the Garnishee Order Absolute a barren order.
Application for review dated 17th July 2026
[4] The 3rd Garnishee, KCB seeks: -
1. THAT this application be certified as urgent, he heard ex parte and therefore dispense with service of the same in the first instance.
2. THAT the Honourable Court be pleased to suspend or stay the execution of the Garnishee Order Absolute, given on 2nd July, 2026 in this matter, against the 3rd Garnishee/Applicant, and all consequential orders arising therefrom, pending the hearing and determination of this application.
3. THAT this Honourable Court be pleased to Review, Vary and or set aside, the Garnishee Order Absolute given on 2nd July, 2026, together with all consequential orders thereto.
4. THAT the 2nd Garnishee be granted leave or opportunity to ventilate its position, regarding the Decree Holder's Garnishee Notice of Motion dated 13th April, 2026, the attachability status of the bank account, KURA DEV A/C No.1130723704 and the said application be heard de novo, on merit.
5. THAT costs of this application be provided for.
[5] In support thereof, KCB stated the following grounds: -
a. On 2nd July, 2026, this Honourable Court issued a Garnishee Order Absolute against the 3rd Garnishee herein, for satisfaction of a decretal amount of Ksh. 3,665,484.35/=.
b. However, vide the Decree Holder's Notice of Motion dated 13.04.2026, the Decree Holder put forward that the decretal amount stood at Ksh. 3,589,960.581=.
c. There is also discovery of new evidence that, the National Treasury and Economic Planning, recognizes the Account sought to be attached KURA DEV A/C No. 1130723704, as an Exchequer account funded by the Government of the Republic of Kenya for public development projects and other statutory obligations and based on this, the subject account is disqualified from execution by Garnishee Proceedings.
d. These facts were not within the knowledge of 3rd Garnishee at first sight.
e. The Applicant is thus aggrieved by the Garnishee Order Absolute made on 2.7.2026 sought to be reviewed and or set aside, as it is oppressive.
f. The Garnishee proceedings cannot be maintained against the Government entity and any debt against the Government can only be enforced strictly under the provisions of the Government Proceedings Act
g. The new development, has led to the delayed compliance of the 3rd Garnishee/Applicant herein with the order absolute issued.
h. It has also been brought to the 3rd Garnishee/Applicant's attention that there is a disparity in the decretal amount to be released. From the Decree Holder's Notice of Motion dated 13.04.2026, the decretal amount sought stands at Ksh. 3,589,960.58/=, whereas the Garnishee Order Absolute directs the 3rd Garnishee to pay out Ksh. 3,665,484.351/= which was therefore incorrect and overstated.
i. That there is need for this Honourable Court with the aid of all the parties herein, to clarify on the attachability of the subject bank account and the accurate amount, against which execution should be levied.
j. The Decree Holder/Respondent has filed an application dated 10th July, 2026, seeking to cite the 3rd Garnishee and its employees for contempt of court.
k. Noting that the issue of attachability of the subject bank account and the disparities in the decretal amount, have been brought to the 3rd Garnishee's attention, after the issuance of the Garnishee Order Absolute, it is of paramount importance that this Honourable Court do intervene and the issues raised be clarified.
l. That the 3rd Garnishee/Applicant is a law abiding citizen, and has maintained lien of the amount, Ksh.3,589,960.58/= in good faith.
m. In view of the presenting issues, its only meet and just that an order for Stay of Execution of the Garnishee Order Absolute given on 2nd July, 2026, be granted pending hearing and determination of this application.
n. There are sufficient reasons advanced to review and set aside the order given on 2.7.2026.
o. It is a principle of law that while a court is rendering justice to one party its should not cause injustice to the other party.
p. No prejudice will be occasioned to the Decree holder/Respondent if the orders sought are granted.
Analysis and determination
[6] The are two application before the court. One is for contempt of court and the other for review and setting aside of the garnishee order absolute forming the basis for contempt. Proper ordering therefore is to begin with the application for setting aside and then proceed to the one for contempt.
[6] Review application. However, the application for review was to be treated as a reply or in opposition to the application for contempt. Therefore, there are bound to be such nexus points or intersections.
Application for review
[7] The active prayer in the application by the Garnishee-KCB- is review and setting aside the garnishee order absolute. The reason given is that the account attached in the garnishee order absolute is a treasury account and therefore not attachable under the law. The bank states that this is new information and should cause a review and setting aside of the garnishee order.
The relevant part of the communication by the National Treasury (GM3A)provided is as hereunder: -
Communication from National Treasury and Economic Planning dated 11th July 2025 Ref. AG.3/88/1 Vol.91 / (64)
…
Pursuant to Sec.28(1) of the Public Finance Management (PFM) Act, 2012, The National Treasury authority is hereby granted to enable Kenya Urban Roads Authority to continue operating two Bank accounts as followed;
No. Account Name Account No. Bank Branch
1 KURA – GoK Development 1340567369 Kenya Commercial Bank Ltd. JKIA
2 KURA – RMLF Retention 1341201716 Kenya Commercial Bank Ltd. JKIA
…
[7] They argued that they received new information on non-attachability of the account in issue. I also see email from KURA to KCB (GM2) sent on 6.7.26 informing KCB that the attached account is an exchequer account and asked them to check their records for authorization for the same by National Treasury and CBK. Two notable things. The email quotes account number 1340567369. GM3A is the communication from treasury and is dated 11.7.2025 which lists two account. The attached account is not listed in the said communication nor subject of the email communication between the garnishees herein.
[8] Therefore, there is nothing to show that the attached account number 1130723704 is an exchequer account or not liable to attachment as alleged.
[9] In any event, the information could not have been new given the date of the communication from the treasury. It also appears that the information was with the bank already. Again, the information was available to KURA all along and its legal counsel has been attending court in all occasions the orders have been considered. Therefore, the bank cannot claim this was new information or that it was not available when they made a commitment to pay the garnishee order.
[10] The other reason advanced that there was need for clarity on the sum due is a red herring because a garnishee pays what is stated in the garnishee order absolute.
[11] In the circumstances of this case, the reservations expressed by the decree holder on the communications between the garnishees are not idle. The bank should live the averment that it is law abiding.
[12] These findings are also relevant in the application for contempt. They offer no reprieve or reasonable explanation why they could not obey the garnishee order absolute.
[13] The application miserably fails the test in section 80 and order 45 of the Civil Procedure Act and Civil Procedure Rules, respectively.
Contempt application
[14] The decree holder seeks the MD, CEO, Head of Legal Department or Company Secretary of KCB to be cited for contempt of court.
KCB argued that a garnishee cannot be held in contempt of court-that it is not available in garnishee proceedings- and that the only aperture is to attach and sell the garnishee’s property. As long as these arguments are intended to represent the position of the law, are not defensible.
[15] The option of contempt of court proceedings against a garnishee who disobeys a garnishee order is available in law to address disobedience by the garnishee of the garnishee order. Whereas execution against the assets of the garnishee is provided in law, it is not the only option but one of the options of execution against a recalcitrant garnishee, but, always the last resort. Thus, the application for contempt of court is properly grounded.
[16] Similarly, it is not a defence to say that the garnishee order did not have any specified time for compliance. By the very nature of garnishee order makes it incumbent upon the garnishee to act swiftly and promptly to avoid defeating the purpose of garnishee proceedings. In addition, in this case, the garnishee averred under oath that it is ready and willing to pay the sums attached upon issuance of the garnishee order absolute. The order absolute was made in the presence of the legal counsel for the garnishee. Making it merely an excuse to state that there was not time fixed for compliance. The garnishee is engaging in mischievous attempts to defeat the order of the court. It bears repeating that KCB should live the averment that it is law abiding.
[17] For these reasons, I find the MD and CEO to be in contempt. They shall however get an opportunity to purge the contempt by paying the sums ordered within 3 days of today which failing they shall be sentence appropriately on a date to be appointed.
ORDERS
[18] Application for review is not merited as the account under attachment is not one of accounts listed in the communication by treasury. Similarly, there was not any discovery of new and compelling evidence to warrant review or setting aside of the order in question. The application is dismissed with costs.
[19] The application for contempt is allowed. More specifically, I find the MD and CEO to be in contempt. They shall however get an opportunity to purge the contempt by paying the sums ordered within 3 days of today which failing they shall be sentence appropriately on a date to be appointed.
Dated, signed and delivered at Nairobi through Microsoft Teams online application this 30th day of July 2026
-------------------
F. Gikonyo M
In the presence of: -
Muthoka for Decree Holder
Ms Adhiambo for Judgment Debtor
Ms. Wangari for Mahinda for 3rd Garnishee
Bett for 2nd Garnishee
CA- Ivan/Aggrey
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
MILIMANI LAW COURTS
COMMERCIAL AND TAX DIVISION
MISC/E443/2022
HOWARD & NICK
VERSUS
CHINA QINGJIAN INTERNATIONAL GROUP (KENYA) LIMITED
RULING
[1] Before me are two applications. The Application for contempt dated 10th July 2026. And the Application for review dated 17th July. 2026
Application for contempt dated 10th July 2026
[2] The decree holder seeks: -
1. THAT this Application be certified as urgent and service thereof upon the Respondents be dispensed with in the first instance.
2. THAT the 1st and 2nd Contemnors being the Managing Director/ Chief Executive Officer & the Head of Legal Services/Company Secretary of Kenya Commercial Bank Kenya Limited, the 3rd Garnishee herein, be cited for contempt of court for deliberately failing to pay the Decree Holder/ Applicant Kenya Shillings Three Million, Six Hundred and Sixty-Five Thousand, Four Hundred and Eighty-Four and Thirty-Five Cents (Kshs. 3,665,484.35/=) less Kenya Shillings Fifteen Thousand (Kshs. 15,000/=) due as per the Garnishee Order absolute issued by this Honorable Court on 2nd July 2026.
3. THAT this Honorable Court be pleased to issue an order committing the 1st and 2nd Contemnors being the Managing Director/ Chief Executive Officer & the Head of Legal Services/Company Secretary of Kenya Commercial Bank Kenya Limited, the 3rd Garnishee herein to civil jail for a period not exceeding six (6) months on account of the flagrant, deliberate and willful breach of the Garnishee Order Absolute issued by this Honorable Court on 2nd July 2026.
4. THAT the warrants of arrest and committal to civil jail be executed by the Officer Commanding Station, Central Police Station or through any other officer in a position to execute the said warrants as may ultimately be designated by this Honorable Court.
5. THAT additionally, this Honorable be pleased to issue an order imposing a fine/ penalty payable directly by Kenya Commercial Bank Kenya Limited, the 3rd Garnishee herein to the Decree Holder/Applicant herein as punitive damages for the continuous and deliberate frustration of the execution process.
6. THAT the costs of and incidental to this Application be borne by the 3rd Garnishee (Kenya Commercial Bank Kenya Limited) on a full indemnity basis.
Grounds for the application
[3] In support thereof, the following grounds were stated: -
a. THAT on 2nd July 2026, this Honorable Court issued a Garnishee Order Absolute upon funds held in Bank Account: Kenya Commercial Bank Kenya Limited, Moi. Avenue Branch Nairobi: A/C Number: 1130723704, the 3rd Garnishee herein and any other account (s) or securities so held by the Judgment Debtor with the 3rd Garnishee, and that the said sums be paid to the Decree Holder in satisfaction of the decretal sum of Kenya Shillings Three Million, Six Hundred and Sixty Five Thousand, Four Hundred and Eighty Four and Thirty Five Cents (Kshs. 3,665,484.35/=) less Kenya Shillings Fifteen Thousand (Kshs. 15,000/=) being the cost of the Garnishee and the same be attached upon it and held to answer the order passed against the Judgment Debtor.
b. Vide a Replying Affidavit sworn on 6th May 2026 by Wambugu Joseph Mwangi, the Corporate Manager, Corporate Services Department at the 3rd Garnishee's Moi Avenue Branch, the 3rd Garnishee expressly confirmed "locking and/or holding in lien a sum total of Kenya Shillings Three Million, Five Hundred and Eighty-Nine Thousand, Nine Hundred and Sixty and Fifty-Eight Cents (Kshs. 3,589,960.58/=). The 3rd Garnishee also confirmed its "readiness and willingness to release the attached sum, upon issuance and subsequent service of a Garnishee Order Absolute."
c. Despite prior knowledge of the existing debt, making a commitment under oath to affect the said payment upon service of a garnishee order absolute, receipt of service and knowledge of the Garnishee Order Absolute dated 2nd July 2026, the 3rd Garnishee has since reversed their stance and showed defiance by deliberately failing, refusing, neglecting and/or omitting to honor the Garnishee Order Absolute in wanton disregard and contempt of court process.
d. The Decree Holder has stumbled upon embarrassing, audacious and daring evidence to demonstrate that the 3rd Garnishee's officers have yielded to the authority of the Judgment Debtor's Advocates and the 2nd Garnishee's Assistant Director, Legal Services, Peter O. Bosire rather than the authority of this Honorable Court in a determined and concerted effort aimed at defeating, frustrating & circumventing the Garnishee Order absolute issued on 2nd July 2026 by deliberately & maliciously "halting the payments" in a bid to subvert this Court's execution process.
e. The Garnishee Order Absolute issued on 2nd July 2026 has neither been set aside, discharged, reviewed nor has there been any order issued by any court to stay the execution thereof. The 3rd Garnishee is therefore deliberately and willingly acting in criminal obstruction of justice and in utter contempt of explicit court orders.
f. The 3rd Garnishee's conduct is mala fides, constitutes corporate recalcitrance and deliberate, flagrant and wilful collusion in breaching the Garnishee Order Absolute dated 2nd July 2026 thereby subjecting the authority and dignity of this Court to severe disrepute.
g. Unless this Honorable Court intervenes and invokes its jurisdiction to curb contempt, the 3rd Garnishee will continue acting in wilful and deliberate breach of the Garnishee Order Absolute issued on 2nd July 2026 and succeed in colluding with the Judgment Debtor and the 2nd Garnishee in subverting court process and rendering the Garnishee Order Absolute a barren order.
Application for review dated 17th July 2026
[4] The 3rd Garnishee, KCB seeks: -
1. THAT this application be certified as urgent, he heard ex parte and therefore dispense with service of the same in the first instance.
2. THAT the Honourable Court be pleased to suspend or stay the execution of the Garnishee Order Absolute, given on 2nd July, 2026 in this matter, against the 3rd Garnishee/Applicant, and all consequential orders arising therefrom, pending the hearing and determination of this application.
3. THAT this Honourable Court be pleased to Review, Vary and or set aside, the Garnishee Order Absolute given on 2nd July, 2026, together with all consequential orders thereto.
4. THAT the 2nd Garnishee be granted leave or opportunity to ventilate its position, regarding the Decree Holder's Garnishee Notice of Motion dated 13th April, 2026, the attachability status of the bank account, KURA DEV A/C No.1130723704 and the said application be heard de novo, on merit.
5. THAT costs of this application be provided for.
[5] In support thereof, KCB stated the following grounds: -
a. On 2nd July, 2026, this Honourable Court issued a Garnishee Order Absolute against the 3rd Garnishee herein, for satisfaction of a decretal amount of Ksh. 3,665,484.35/=.
b. However, vide the Decree Holder's Notice of Motion dated 13.04.2026, the Decree Holder put forward that the decretal amount stood at Ksh. 3,589,960.581=.
c. There is also discovery of new evidence that, the National Treasury and Economic Planning, recognizes the Account sought to be attached KURA DEV A/C No. 1130723704, as an Exchequer account funded by the Government of the Republic of Kenya for public development projects and other statutory obligations and based on this, the subject account is disqualified from execution by Garnishee Proceedings.
d. These facts were not within the knowledge of 3rd Garnishee at first sight.
e. The Applicant is thus aggrieved by the Garnishee Order Absolute made on 2.7.2026 sought to be reviewed and or set aside, as it is oppressive.
f. The Garnishee proceedings cannot be maintained against the Government entity and any debt against the Government can only be enforced strictly under the provisions of the Government Proceedings Act
g. The new development, has led to the delayed compliance of the 3rd Garnishee/Applicant herein with the order absolute issued.
h. It has also been brought to the 3rd Garnishee/Applicant's attention that there is a disparity in the decretal amount to be released. From the Decree Holder's Notice of Motion dated 13.04.2026, the decretal amount sought stands at Ksh. 3,589,960.58/=, whereas the Garnishee Order Absolute directs the 3rd Garnishee to pay out Ksh. 3,665,484.351/= which was therefore incorrect and overstated.
i. That there is need for this Honourable Court with the aid of all the parties herein, to clarify on the attachability of the subject bank account and the accurate amount, against which execution should be levied.
j. The Decree Holder/Respondent has filed an application dated 10th July, 2026, seeking to cite the 3rd Garnishee and its employees for contempt of court.
k. Noting that the issue of attachability of the subject bank account and the disparities in the decretal amount, have been brought to the 3rd Garnishee's attention, after the issuance of the Garnishee Order Absolute, it is of paramount importance that this Honourable Court do intervene and the issues raised be clarified.
l. That the 3rd Garnishee/Applicant is a law abiding citizen, and has maintained lien of the amount, Ksh.3,589,960.58/= in good faith.
m. In view of the presenting issues, its only meet and just that an order for Stay of Execution of the Garnishee Order Absolute given on 2nd July, 2026, be granted pending hearing and determination of this application.
n. There are sufficient reasons advanced to review and set aside the order given on 2.7.2026.
o. It is a principle of law that while a court is rendering justice to one party its should not cause injustice to the other party.
p. No prejudice will be occasioned to the Decree holder/Respondent if the orders sought are granted.
Analysis and determination
[6] The are two application before the court. One is for contempt of court and the other for review and setting aside of the garnishee order absolute forming the basis for contempt. Proper ordering therefore is to begin with the application for setting aside and then proceed to the one for contempt.
[6] Review application. However, the application for review was to be treated as a reply or in opposition to the application for contempt. Therefore, there are bound to be such nexus points or intersections.
Application for review
[7] The active prayer in the application by the Garnishee-KCB- is review and setting aside the garnishee order absolute. The reason given is that the account attached in the garnishee order absolute is a treasury account and therefore not attachable under the law. The bank states that this is new information and should cause a review and setting aside of the garnishee order.
The relevant part of the communication by the National Treasury (GM3A)provided is as hereunder: -
Communication from National Treasury and Economic Planning dated 11th July 2025 Ref. AG.3/88/1 Vol.91 / (64)
…
Pursuant to Sec.28(1) of the Public Finance Management (PFM) Act, 2012, The National Treasury authority is hereby granted to enable Kenya Urban Roads Authority to continue operating two Bank accounts as followed;
No. Account Name Account No. Bank Branch
1 KURA – GoK Development 1340567369 Kenya Commercial Bank Ltd. JKIA
2 KURA – RMLF Retention 1341201716 Kenya Commercial Bank Ltd. JKIA
…
[7] They argued that they received new information on non-attachability of the account in issue. I also see email from KURA to KCB (GM2) sent on 6.7.26 informing KCB that the attached account is an exchequer account and asked them to check their records for authorization for the same by National Treasury and CBK. Two notable things. The email quotes account number 1340567369. GM3A is the communication from treasury and is dated 11.7.2025 which lists two account. The attached account is not listed in the said communication nor subject of the email communication between the garnishees herein.
[8] Therefore, there is nothing to show that the attached account number 1130723704 is an exchequer account or not liable to attachment as alleged.
[9] In any event, the information could not have been new given the date of the communication from the treasury. It also appears that the information was with the bank already. Again, the information was available to KURA all along and its legal counsel has been attending court in all occasions the orders have been considered. Therefore, the bank cannot claim this was new information or that it was not available when they made a commitment to pay the garnishee order.
[10] The other reason advanced that there was need for clarity on the sum due is a red herring because a garnishee pays what is stated in the garnishee order absolute.
[11] In the circumstances of this case, the reservations expressed by the decree holder on the communications between the garnishees are not idle. The bank should live the averment that it is law abiding.
[12] These findings are also relevant in the application for contempt. They offer no reprieve or reasonable explanation why they could not obey the garnishee order absolute.
[13] The application miserably fails the test in section 80 and order 45 of the Civil Procedure Act and Civil Procedure Rules, respectively.
Contempt application
[14] The decree holder seeks the MD, CEO, Head of Legal Department or Company Secretary of KCB to be cited for contempt of court.
KCB argued that a garnishee cannot be held in contempt of court-that it is not available in garnishee proceedings- and that the only aperture is to attach and sell the garnishee’s property. As long as these arguments are intended to represent the position of the law, are not defensible.
[15] The option of contempt of court proceedings against a garnishee who disobeys a garnishee order is available in law to address disobedience by the garnishee of the garnishee order. Whereas execution against the assets of the garnishee is provided in law, it is not the only option but one of the options of execution against a recalcitrant garnishee, but, always the last resort. Thus, the application for contempt of court is properly grounded.
[16] Similarly, it is not a defence to say that the garnishee order did not have any specified time for compliance. By the very nature of garnishee order makes it incumbent upon the garnishee to act swiftly and promptly to avoid defeating the purpose of garnishee proceedings. In addition, in this case, the garnishee averred under oath that it is ready and willing to pay the sums attached upon issuance of the garnishee order absolute. The order absolute was made in the presence of the legal counsel for the garnishee. Making it merely an excuse to state that there was not time fixed for compliance. The garnishee is engaging in mischievous attempts to defeat the order of the court. It bears repeating that KCB should live the averment that it is law abiding.
[17] For these reasons, I find the MD and CEO to be in contempt. They shall however get an opportunity to purge the contempt by paying the sums ordered within 3 days of today which failing they shall be sentence appropriately on a date to be appointed.
ORDERS
[18] Application for review is not merited as the account under attachment is not one of accounts listed in the communication by treasury. Similarly, there was not any discovery of new and compelling evidence to warrant review or setting aside of the order in question. The application is dismissed with costs.
[19] The application for contempt is allowed. More specifically, I find the MD and CEO to be in contempt. They shall however get an opportunity to purge the contempt by paying the sums ordered within 3 days of today which failing they shall be sentence appropriately on a date to be appointed.
Dated, signed and delivered at Nairobi through Microsoft Teams online application this 30th day of July 2026
-------------------
F. Gikonyo M
In the presence of: -
Muthoka for Decree Holder
Ms Adhiambo for Judgment Debtor
Ms. Wangari for Mahinda for 3rd Garnishee
Bett for 2nd Garnishee
CA- Ivan/Aggrey