A Dubai-based creditor has lost its bid to challenge the process that led to the takeover of Savannah Cement, with the High Court backing the actions taken by the administrator as part of the restructure of the company.
The decision closes a dispute over the sale that culminated in the acquisition of Savannah Cement by a consortium of Kenyan millers in 2025 after the cement maker collapsed under debts exceeding Sh14 billion.
The court dismissed W. General Trading LLC’s bid to stop the process that led to Savannah Cement’s takeover.
The Dubai company claimed Savannah Cement owed it $4.5 million (Sh582.7 million) and sought orders stopping the disposal of the company’s assets.
The creditor had accused administrator Peter Kahi of pursuing the sale n an opaque manner. It argued that unsecured creditors risked being prejudiced because no valuation of the assets had been undertaken before potential buyers were invited to express interest.
The dispute arose after the administrator published a notice seeking expressions of interest from investors interested in purchasing Savannah Cement’s business and assets as part of the administration process.
W. General Trading argued that creditors who met in April 2024 had approved a different strategy under which the company’s assets would be leased out while professional valuers assessed their worth. The company told the court it was surprised to see the administrator initiate a sale while its debt remained unpaid.
Mr Kahi opposed the application and told the court that creditors had approved his proposals during a meeting held on April 17, 2024.
He said the invitation for expressions of interest was consistent with resolutions adopted by creditors and was intended to achieve the objectives of administration.
The administrator also rejected claims that the process lacked transparency. He said the creditor had previously raised 12 concerns regarding the administration and that detailed responses had been provided.
Mr Kahi further told the court that valuation of the assets would be undertaken before any transaction was concluded.
The court agreed with the administrator and declined to halt the process.
It held insolvency courts should generally avoid interfering with an administration process unless it is being conducted oppressively or contrary to the objectives of the law.
“What the Insolvency Court has to do is to examine whether the conduct of the parties and the administrator does conform with section 522 of the Act,” said the judge.
“An administration is not to be interfered with unless it does not conform with the objectives of the Act.”
The court found that creditors had approved the administrator’s proposals and that there was no basis for stating that the process was unlawful.
“That being the case, I do not think that the actions of the first respondent (administrator) were reprehensible to warrant the orders sought,” the judge stated.
The ruling comes after a lengthy restructuring process at Savannah Cement, which was founded in 2012 and later emerged as one of the region’s largest cement producers.
The company was placed under administration in November 2022 after struggling with mounting losses and debt obligations accumulated over several years.
Its administration became one of the most closely watched corporate rescue processes because of the scale of creditor claims and the strategic importance of the manufacturer.
The company’s business was eventually acquired in August 2025 by a consortium comprising Mombasa Maize Millers, Kitui Flour Mills and Eldoret Grains Limited.
The new owners subsequently renamed the company Savannah Cement 2025 Limited, marking the end of a restructuring process that pitted lenders, trade creditors and investors against each other in a battle over the factory’s future.