[2010] KEHC 172 (KLR)

[2010] KEHC 172 (KLR)

The court found that the delay in registering the charge was occasioned by the existence of a prior charge in favour of Standard Chartered Bank, which was only discharged on 30th March, 2010. As the mandatory period for registration had lapsed due to circumstances beyond the applicant's control, the court exercised...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2010] KEHC 172 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Co-operative Bank of Kenya Limited; Respondent: Midland Autoservices Limited
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Miscellaneous Application 336 of 2010
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Notice of Motion for Extension of Time to Register Charge
Outcome
application allowed
Judges
A. Ong’injo
Legal Topics
Company Charge Registration, Extension of Time, Secured Transactions
Source Language
en
Commercial and Corporate Civil Procedure Company Charge Registration Extension of Time Secured Transactions

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Co-operative Bank of Kenya Limited

Applicant

Midland Autoservices Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Notice of Motion for Extension of Time to Register Charge

  1. 1 Whether the applicant should be granted leave to come on record for the applicant.
  2. 2 Whether the time for registration of the charge dated 8th February, 2010 over L.R. No. 209/6850 should be extended.
  3. 3 Whether the delay in registration was excusable under the circumstances.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the delay in registering the charge was occasioned by the existence of a prior charge in favour of Standard Chartered Bank, which was only discharged on 30th March, 2010. As the mandatory period for registration had lapsed due to circumstances beyond the applicant's control, the court exercised its discretion under section 102 of the Companies Act to extend the time for registration. The court was satisfied that the applicant had provided sufficient cause for the delay and that the extension was necessary to perfect the security interest. Accordingly, the court granted the extension of time for registration of the charge for a period of 30 days from the date of the...

Court Disposition

application allowed

Orders

  • The firm of Robson Harris and Company Advocates is granted leave to come on record for the applicant.
  • The time for registration at the Companies Registry of the charge dated 8th February, 2010 over L.R. No. 209/6850 is extended for a period of 30 days from the date of this ruling.