Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCPartially AllowedNot stated in the judgment (ex parte application dated 14th September 2021)· [2021] KEELC 2015 (KLR)

In re Application for Extension of time for Registration of a Charge by Silverspead Hardwares Limited in Favour of Bank of Baroda (Kenya) Limited [2021] KEELC 2015 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court of Kenya
16 September 2021
714 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~3 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Environment and Land Court let a bank register a late charge, holding a lawyer's honest mistake shouldn't cost a lender its security.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
Bank of Baroda (Kenya) Ltd, as chargee under a charge of Kshs.140,000,000 dated 10th June 2021 over parcel Ntima/Igoki/5907 registered in the name of Silverspread Hardware Ltd, applied ex parte under sections 885, 887 and 888 of the Companies Act 2015, sections 1A, 1B and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act and Article 159 of the Constitution for extension of time by sixty days to register the charge with the Registrar of Companies. The charge was registered at the lands registry on 12th July 2021, but through counsel's inadvertent mistake registration at the companies registry within the statutory 30-day period under section 885 was missed. In a supporting affidavit, Christine Murithi acknowledged counsel's mistake and sought the court's discretion. C.K. Nzili, ELC Judge, set out four parameters: whether the default was accidental or due to inadvertence, absence of prejudice to creditors or members, whether extension is just, equitable, fair and reasonable, and rectifiability. Holding that registration of the charge protects the chargee and the general body of creditors, and relying on Philip Chemwolo v Kubede, Re Shreeji Apartments Ltd and Re Ashpurton Estates Ltd on the court's wide discretion to relieve against blunders of counsel, the court found the omission was due to inadvertence and rectifiable. The deadline was extended for 120 days from 10th June 2021, with no orders as to costs, and the file was marked as closed.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the court should extend time to register a charge with the Registrar of Companies beyond the statutory 30-day period

Holding

The court extended the deadline, holding the failure was due to counsel's inadvertence and the chargee should not lose the benefit of its security.

Reasoning

The charge was duly registered at the lands registry on 12th July 2021; the omission was only registration at the companies registry, attributable to the applicant's lawyers' inadvertent mistake. The court adopted four parameters: inadvertence or reasonable cause, absence of prejudice to creditors or members, whether the extension is just, equitable, fair and reasonable, and rectifiability. Registration of the charge protects the chargee and the general body of creditors, and denial of extension would deprive the chargee of recourse against the charged property. The court invoked its wide discretion as recognised in Re Shreeji Apartments Ltd and Re Ashpurton Estates Ltd to do substantive justice.

p. 2
02

Whether mistake of counsel constitutes inadvertence justifying relief

Holding

Yes - blunders of counsel do not warrant denying a party substantive relief where some activity was done.

Reasoning

Relying on Philip Chemwolo & another v Augustine Kubede, the court held that mistakes are made from time to time and a party should not suffer the penalty of losing the benefit of its case or security merely because a mistake occurred; in the present matter counsel had done some activity (registration at the lands registry) and could not be said to have been indolent.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • The court has discretion under section 888 of the Companies Act to extend the 30-day deadline for registering a charge with the Registrar of Companies where the default was due to inadvertence, the application is just and equitable, and the omission is rectifiable.
  • Mistakes of counsel should not deprive a chargee of the benefit of its charge for non-registration.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The deadline for registration of the charge with the Registrar of Companies is extended for 120 days from 10.6.2021
  2. 2.No orders as to costs
  3. 3.The file is marked as closed

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Companies Act 2015sections 884, 885, 887, 888
  • Civil Procedure Actsections 1A, 1B, 3A
  • Constitution of Kenya 2010Article 159

Cases cited (3)

  • Philip Chemwolo & another vs Augustine Kubede
    (1982-88) KLR 103
  • Re Shreeji apartments Ltd
    (2014) eKLR
  • Re Ashpurton Estates Ltd
    (1983) CH 110
Jurisdiction invoked
Sections 885, 887 and 888 of the Companies Act 2015; Section 1A, 1B and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act; Article 159 of the Constitution

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "In re Application for Extension of time for Registration of a Charge by Silverspead Hardwares Limited in Favour of Bank of Baroda (Kenya) Limited [2021] KEELC 2015 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2021). Not stated in the judgment (ex parte application dated 14th September 2021). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2021/2015/eng@2021-09-16

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.