[2009] KEHC 366 (KLR)
The court found that the respondent had conceded to non-payment of rent since 1st January 2008 and that the applicant was entitled to recover the outstanding arrears. The court held that statutory management did not absolve the respondent from its rental obligations. Given the respondent's continued default and the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2009] KEHC 366 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Legal Properties Holdings Kenya Ltd; Respondent: Invesco Assurance Company Ltd (under statutory management); Respondent: Contributories (represented by Mr. King’ara)
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Winding Up Cause 19 of 2007
- Procedural Posture
- Winding Up Cause / Ruling on Application for Leave to Levy Distress and Eviction Orders
- Outcome
- Application allowed with orders for payment of arrears, distress, termination of lease, and eviction.
- Judges
- LK Kimaru
- Legal Topics
- Statutory Management, Landlord Tenant Disputes, Rent Arrears, Distress for Rent, Eviction Orders
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Legal Properties Holdings Kenya Ltd
Applicant
Invesco Assurance Company Ltd (under statutory management)
Respondent
Contributories (represented by Mr. King’ara)
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Winding Up Cause / Ruling on Application for Leave to Levy Distress and Eviction Orders
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to levy distress for unpaid rent against the respondent under statutory management.
- 2 Whether the applicant is entitled to an order for eviction of the respondent from the leased premises due to non-payment of rent.
- 3 Whether the respondent should be granted additional time to pay the outstanding rent or vacate the premises.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the respondent had conceded to non-payment of rent since 1st January 2008 and that the applicant was entitled to recover the outstanding arrears. The court held that statutory management did not absolve the respondent from its rental obligations. Given the respondent's continued default and the applicant's ongoing prejudice, the court granted the applicant leave to levy distress for rent if arrears were not paid by 15th December 2009. The court further ordered that the lease would be deemed terminated if payment was not made by that date, and the applicant would be at liberty to evict the respondent seven days thereafter. The court balanced the interests by allowing...
Court Disposition
Application allowed with orders for payment of arrears, distress, termination of lease, and eviction.
Orders
- The respondent shall pay outstanding rent arrears up to and including 30th November 2009 by 15th December 2009.
- In default of payment, the applicant is at liberty to levy distress on the respondent’s property in the premises.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
20 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT NAIROBI (MILIMANI COMMERCIAL COURTS)
Winding Up Cause 19 of 2007
IN THE MATTER OF INVESCO ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD
AND
IN THE MATTER OF THE COMPANIES ACT
CHAPTER 486 LAWS OF KENYA
LEGAL PROPERTEIS HOLDINGS KENYA LTD………APPLICANT
VERSUS
INVESCO ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD
(UNDER STATUTORY MANAGEMENT) ………...…..RESPONDENT
RULING
The respondent was placed under statutory management by the Insurance Regulatory Authority. Prior to the respondent being placed under statutory management, it had leased 2,587 square feet in the 3rd floor and 3,820 square feet on the 5th floor of the applicant’s premises known as St. Ellis House Nairobi. According to the applicant, since 1st January 2008, the respondent has failed to pay rent in respect of the said leased premises. As at 1st April 2009, the respondent owed to the applicant the sum of Ksh.9,697,767. 80. The rent arrears have continued to accrue on the account of the fact that todate, the respondent has not paid any rent to the applicant. The applicant therefore seeks the leave of this court to levy distress for the said outstanding rent. The applicant further prays that the court orders the respondent to vacate the suit premises or in default thereof the applicant be at liberty to evict them.
The respondent did not file any papers in opposition to the application. The court however allowed Mr. Orowe for the statutory manager and Mr. King’ara for the contributories to make oral presentation to the court. Mr. Orowe told the court that the statutory manager was in the process of reviving the respondent insurance company. He pleaded with the court to give the statutory manager up to 1st December 2009 to enable him conclude the negotiations that will lead to the revival of the respondent company. On his part, Mr. King’ara told the court that the respondent pleads for time up to 21st December 2009 to either pay the outstanding arrears or vacate the premises. Mr. Sigei for the applicant urged the court to allow the application in light of the prejudice that the applicant has suffered and is continuing to suffer.
I have carefully considered the issue in dispute in this application. It is conceded by the respondent that it has not paid rent from 1st January 2008. The applicant is entitled to be paid the outstanding rent. According to the applicant, the suit premises have been locked up since the respondent was placed under statutory management. I think the applicant has established a case for this court to grant the orders sought in the application. I direct the respondent to pay the outstanding rent arrears up to and including 30th November 2009 by the 15th December 2009 or in default thereof the applicant shall be at liberty to levy distress on the respondent’s property in the said premises. I further direct that the respondent’s lease in respect of the said premises shall be considered as terminated by 15th December 2009 if the respondent does not pay the outstanding rent arrears. The applicant shall be at liberty to evict the respondent seven (7) days after the said date of 15th December 2009 if the respondent does not vacate the premises. For the avoidance of doubt, the respondent shall be allowed to remove its files from the said offices. However, other items such as computers, office desks, shelves, office chairs shall not be removed if the outstanding rent arrears are not paid. These are some of the items that the applicant will distrain for rent in the event that the said rent arrears are not paid.
The applicant shall have the costs of this application. It is so ordered.
DATED AT NAIROBI THIS 27TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2009
L. KIMARU
JUDGE