[2019] KEHC 12386 (KLR)

[2019] KEHC 12386 (KLR)

The court found that the petitioner had obtained a judgment against the respondent for Kshs 1,393,811.29, served the statutory notice as required, and the respondent failed to pay the debt within the statutory period. The respondent did not contest the petition or appear at the hearing. The court was satisfied that...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2019] KEHC 12386 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Stephen Eyauma; Respondent: Invesco Assurance Company Limited
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Insolvency Cause E009 of 2019
Procedural Posture
Insolvency Petition / Judgment
Outcome
petition allowed; company wound up; priority payment to petitioner; costs awarded
Judges
WA Okwany
Legal Topics
Company Insolvency, Winding Up Petition, Statutory Demand, Priority of Debts
Source Language
en
Commercial and Corporate Company Insolvency Winding Up Petition Statutory Demand Priority of Debts

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 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Stephen Eyauma

Applicant

Invesco Assurance Company Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Insolvency Petition / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether Invesco Assurance Company Limited is insolvent and unable to pay its debts as they fall due.
  2. 2 Whether the petitioner is entitled to a winding up order against the respondent under the Companies Act 2015.
  3. 3 Whether the petitioner is entitled to payment of Kshs 1,393,811.29 in priority from the assets of the company.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the petitioner had obtained a judgment against the respondent for Kshs 1,393,811.29, served the statutory notice as required, and the respondent failed to pay the debt within the statutory period. The respondent did not contest the petition or appear at the hearing. The court was satisfied that the petitioner had proved, on a balance of probabilities, that the respondent was unable to pay its debts as they fell due, thus meeting the statutory test for insolvency. Consequently, the court granted the winding up order, directed that the petitioner be paid the decretal sum in priority from the company's assets, and ordered that the winding up proceedings be conducted by...

Court Disposition

petition allowed; company wound up; priority payment to petitioner; costs awarded

Orders

  • Invesco Assurance Company Limited is hereby wound up under the Companies Act 2015.
  • The petitioner shall be paid Kshs 1,393,811.29 out of the assets of the company in priority.