[2019] KEHC 3338 (KLR)
The court held that section 228 of the Companies Act expressly requires leave of the court before any action or proceeding can be commenced or continued against a company in receivership or liquidation. The applicant demonstrated that Muhoroni Sugar Co. Ltd is under receivership and that he seeks to recover an...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2019] KEHC 3338 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Thomas Kimagut Sambu; Respondent: Muhoroni Sugar Co. Ltd (Under Receivership); Respondent: Francis Ooko (Joint Receiver Manager); Respondent: Harun Kirui (Joint Receiver Manager)
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kericho
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Judgment Date
- 22 October 2019
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Civil Application 44 of 2019
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Ex Parte Application for Leave to Institute Proceedings Against Company Under Receivership
- Outcome
- application allowed
- Judges
- GMA Dulu
- Legal Topics
- Receivership, Leave to Sue Company in Receivership, Company Liquidation, Procedure for Suing Company
- Source Language
- english
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Thomas Kimagut Sambu
Applicant
Muhoroni Sugar Co. Ltd (Under Receivership)
Respondent
Francis Ooko (Joint Receiver Manager)
Respondent
Harun Kirui (Joint Receiver Manager)
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Ex Parte Application for Leave to Institute Proceedings Against Company Under Receivership
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether leave of the court is required to institute proceedings against a company under receivership.
- 2 Whether the applicant has demonstrated sufficient grounds to be granted leave to sue the respondents.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that section 228 of the Companies Act expressly requires leave of the court before any action or proceeding can be commenced or continued against a company in receivership or liquidation. The applicant demonstrated that Muhoroni Sugar Co. Ltd is under receivership and that he seeks to recover an unpaid sum for sugarcane supplied. As the application was unopposed and the statutory requirements were met, the court found it appropriate to grant leave to the applicant to commence proceedings against the company and its receiver managers. The court emphasized that such leave is a mandatory procedural safeguard to protect companies in receivership from multiplicity of suits and...
Court Disposition
application allowed
Orders
- Leave is granted to the applicant to commence court proceedings against the respondents as sought.
- Costs in the cause.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
22 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT KERICHO
MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO.44 OF 2019
THOMAS KIMAGUT SAMBU...............................................................PLAINTIFF/APPLICANT
VERSUS
MUHORONI SUGAR CO. LTD
(UNDER RECEIVERSHIP...................................................................................1ST RESPONDENT
FRANCIS OOKO (JOINT RECEIVER MANAGER) .....................................2ND RESPONDENT
HARUN KIRUI (JOINT RECEIVER MANAGER).........................................3RD RESPONDENT
RULING
1. This is an application brought by way of Notice of Motion dated 17th June 2019 by Thomas Kimagut Sambu through counsel M/s Migiro & Company Advocates.
2. The application was brought under section 228 of the Companies Act, and section 1A, 1B, and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act (Cap 21) and Order 51 of the Civil Procedure Rules. It is an application seeking this court’s leave to institute proceedings against Muhoroni Sugar Company Limited under receivership.
3. The application is based on grounds on the face of motion that the applicant was a sugarcane farmer who had supplied 47. 36 tonnes to the factory valued at Kshs.161,000/= which the 1st respondent and its receiver managers the 2nd and 3rd respondents had not settled.
4. The application was filed with a supporting affidavit sworn on 17th June 2019 by the applicant amplifying the grounds of the application.
5. It is an ex-parte application which is not opposed. Mr. Mugumya who appeared in court for the applicant relied on the case of George Mureithi and Others – vs- Kenatco Taxis Limited in receivership – Nairobi Employment and Labour Relations Court Cause No.507 of 2013 [2016]eKLR in which the court dismissed a suit instituted without obtaining such leave.
6. This application is based on section 228 of the Companies Act, which states as follows;
“228: When a winding up order has been made or an interim liquidator has been appointed under section 235, no action or proceeding shall be proceeded with or commenced against the company except by leave of the court and subject to such terms as the court may impose”.
7. With the documents and facts placed before me, I am of the view that it has been demonstrated that the company has been put under liquidation. Thus, if the applicant wishes to institute any court proceedings against the company and its liquidators leave of this court has to be sought and granted.
8. I thus allow the application and grant the applicant herein leave to commence court proceedings against the respondents as sought. Costs in the cause.
Dated and delivered at Kericho this 22nd October 2019.
GEORGE DULU
JUDGE