The trend in recent years has been to apply for an Attachment Order1 — largely because of swift process that it embraces. An Attachment Order can be issued in two situations: (i) one where the debt is based on an executory title or (ii) one where the debt is not based on an executory title. Regardless of the situation, the process used for an Attachment remains the quickest way to recover or secure a creditor’s debt.

What is aN Attachment?

An Attachment (also known as “saisie arrêt”) is a mechanism established and embraced by the Supreme Court of Mauritius whereby a creditor — the applicant — may have recourse to the intervention of the Judge in Chambers to secure or recover the debt owed to him by the debtor.

In effect, a creditor is seeking to forbid a third party, also known as “the garnishee”, from disposing what the latter allegedly owes to the debtor. In simpler terms, if someone (the garnishee) owes the debtor money, an Attachment will allow the creditor to ask the Judge in Chambers to have it paid to the creditor instead. The Judge will also prevent the garnishee from disposing the assets until the final determination of the claim by the creditor.

An application for an Attachment Order is a conservative measure (because the garnishee is essentially prevented from dissipating the seized assets) it ultimately results in payment to the creditor by way of the sale of the seized assets.

An Ex-Parte Application to attach assets

Briefly, an application for an Attachment Order is made ex-parte before the Judge in Chambers. As the process is commenced without notice, the creditor has the comfort of knowing that the debtor will not have an opportunity to conceal the assets or otherwise interfere with the creditor’s efforts.

The procedure to be adopted has been laid down in the leading authority of MCB vs. Sibartie Fils et Compagnie & Sibartie 1988 MR 66, which was recently reaffirmed by the Court of Civil Appeal in Mauritius Duty Free Paradise Co. Ltd v The Mauritius Commercial Bank Ltd & Anor 2022 SCJ 42 where the Court has set out the procedural steps as follows:

  1. Action to secure the debt in the hands of the garnishee;
  2. Action against the debtor;
  3. Action against garnishee; and
  4. The final step in the process of a “saisie-arrêt”.

During the process, irrespective of the status of the creditor’s debt, a creditor needs to ascertain certain essential elements for his application to be successful, as has been established under a string of authorities, one of which is Bomeubles & Cie Ltee v Banks 2015 SCJ 283, which provides that the creditor must show that the debt (“créance”) owed:

i) is certain, of a fixed amount, and due (“certaine, liquide, et exigible”); or

ii) which otherwise appears to be valid in principle (“parait fondée en son principe”). The court in the said case explained that what the creditor must show is not that the debt is certain in principle but rather that the debt is valid in principle, i.e., the genuineness of the debt.

Therefore, any creditor contemplating an application for an Attachment Order must ensure that his debt (whether it is based on an executory title or not) is one which is either certain, of a fixed amount, and due or one which otherwise appears to be valid in principle.

A useful debt enforcement tool

An application for an Attachment Order is a useful debt enforcement tool, which essentially bypasses the debtor and goes to a third party to obtain payment of a debt. It removes the reliance upon the debtor to pay off the debt. The Courts in Mauritius have been dealing with an increasing number of applications for Attachment Orders recently as creditors seem to have realised that this is a sophisticated tool which allows them to have recourse to a remedy that would prevent a defendant from improperly dissipating assets pending the determination of their main dispute.

Although prospective litigants may have recourse to other means of relief such as by way of traditional plaint or by means of a summary remedy such as injunction, such measures do not come without their downsides. To that end, attachment orders seem to yield more comfort to creditors when it comes to securing their debts.

 1 Legal professionals also refer to an attachment order as an “interim attachment order”. These two terms are used interchangeably; the principles and procedure remain the same.
Note 1: Translations of the material into English are intended solely as a convenience to the non-French reading public. Appleby has attempted to provide a translation of the original material into English but due to nuances in translating, slight differences may exist. Always refer to the original texts.
Note 2: This article is for general guidance only and does not constitute definitive legal advice. Please contact one of our lawyers if you require more detailed information.
Twitter LinkedIn Email Save as PDF
More Publications
14 May 2024

What are the tools to aid the arbitral process to combat the undesirable effects of parallel litigation?

The fundamental aspect of arbitration as an alternative dispute mechanism is that despite parties’...

29 Apr 2024

Appleby Mauritius Quarter One Newsletter 2024

As we navigate through this dynamic year, Appleby's first Mauritius newsletter of 2024 sees our team...

29 Apr 2024

Receivership: an enforcement mechanism for lenders

In a world of business, unforeseen circumstances can often arise that lead a company to financial di...

29 Apr 2024

The JCPC reaffirmed the exception to the bank secrecy rule

Further to the oral judgment of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (JCPC) on 06 July 2023 a...

26 Apr 2024

Regulation of Moneylending in Mauritius

Moneylending is a crucial credit device in the world of financial services which plays a significant...

26 Apr 2024

Katra Holdings Ltd v Standard Chartered Bank (Mauritius) Ltd [2024] UKPC 8 - case summary

The Privy Council set aside an appeal challenging a winding up order of a Mauritian company, Katra H...

26 Apr 2024

Statutory Demands - a Review of Recent Decisions

INSOLVENCY - The bankruptcy division of Mauritian Supreme Court re-affirms the test to determine the...

26 Apr 2024

Directors' Duties in the face of insolvency

The duties of directors in relation to companies in Mauritius are laid out under the Companies Act 2...

16 Apr 2024

Absence of assets in Mauritius – not a bar to the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgment

On 12 April 2024, the Mauritian Supreme Court confirmed in Hobler v Harker 2024 SCJ 159, that an app...

12 Apr 2024

Maximising Efficiency in Fund Termination Through Liquidating Trusts in Mauritius

When it comes to terminating a fund licensed under the laws of Mauritius (Company), one of the key r...