Colony Incorporated, a Liberian-owned company and current leaseholder of the former Palm Spring Hotel in Congo Town, has strongly objected to fresh enforcement measures ordered by the Debt Court of Montserrado County.
The action follows a Supreme Court ruling in favor of Chinese businesswoman Ms. Ding Shu Jun, awarding US$1,355,886.00 against businessman Mr. Najib Kamand. Colony Incorporated insists, however, that it was never a party to the case and that its leased property is being wrongfully targeted.
“We are not part of this case,” the company emphasized, noting that the Palm Springs property was legally leased to Colony Incorporated on September 2, 2020, and is no longer owned or controlled by Mr. Kamand or his former businesses.
The company further stressed that the Supreme Court’s ruling made no mention of Colony Incorporated, a separate legal entity operating independently under Mr. Bou Najm Khaled. It questioned the legal basis of the enforcement attempt, recalling that the Debt Court itself had previously ruled that Colony was not liable.
Keep up with the latest headlines on WhatsApp | LinkedIn
On July 31, the Debt Court granted Colony Incorporated’s Bill of Information, ordering the unsealing of its premises and recognizing its valid lease agreement with the Intestate Estate of the late Lawrence A. Morgan. Despite this, enforcement has resumed under the Supreme Court’s mandate, one that Colony argues does not identify the company or its assets.
The latest development has sparked broader concerns among legal analysts and business owners over the risks posed to third-party entities.
“You cannot enforce judgments against properties or entities not included in the final decision,” one analyst cautioned, warning that such actions could erode investor confidence and due process in Liberia.
Colony Incorporated has warned that enforcing the ruling against its property would cause irreparable harm to its operations, staff, and reputation. The company vowed to pursue all legal remedies to stop what it describes as an unlawful and unjust action.
Observers say the case underscores critical questions about procedural overreach and the protection of property rights in Liberia. The outcome, they argue, could set a precedent on whether courts may enforce debt rulings in ways that threaten the rights of unrelated businesses, an issue central to upholding corporate independence and investor trust.
