[2022] KEHC 12891 (KLR)

[2022] KEHC 12891 (KLR)

The court held that the relevant legal provisions governing the continuation of proceedings against a company under receivership are sections 432(2) and 560(1) of the Insolvency Act, not sections 437 and 438 as argued by the defendant. Since a consent order had already been granted by the court on June 16, 2022,...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2022] KEHC 12891 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Northern Rangelands Trading Limited; Defendant: Alpha Fine Foods Limited
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Commercial Case E768 of 2021
Procedural Posture
Commercial Case / Pre Trial Directions and Leave to Proceed Against Company Under Receivership
Outcome
Leave to proceed with the suit against the defendant company under receivership is confirmed; directions issued for service and compliance.
Judges
DO Chepkwony
Legal Topics
Company Liquidation, Receivership, Leave to Continue Proceedings, Consent Orders
Source Language
en
Commercial and Corporate Civil Procedure Company Liquidation Receivership Leave to Continue Proceedings Consent Orders

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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Northern Rangelands Trading Limited

Plaintiff

Alpha Fine Foods Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Case / Pre Trial Directions and Leave to Proceed Against Company Under Receivership

  1. 1 Whether proceedings can continue against a company under receivership after appointment of an official receiver.
  2. 2 Whether the prior consent order granting leave to proceed is binding despite the defendant's receivership status.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the relevant legal provisions governing the continuation of proceedings against a company under receivership are sections 432(2) and 560(1) of the Insolvency Act, not sections 437 and 438 as argued by the defendant. Since a consent order had already been granted by the court on June 16, 2022, allowing the plaintiff to proceed with the suit against the defendant company, and this order had not been reviewed, appealed, or set aside, the defendant could not rely on the subsequent appointment of the official receiver to halt the proceedings. The court found that the defendant's counsel's attempt to renege on the consent order was without merit. The plaintiff was directed...

Court Disposition

Leave to proceed with the suit against the defendant company under receivership is confirmed; directions issued for service and compliance.

Orders

  • The plaintiff is directed to serve pleadings on the defendant's official receiver, who may join as an interested party.
  • The defendant's counsel is at liberty to file and serve any necessary application if they are no longer instructed to act.