SheriaNet for Android — search and read Kenyan case law from your phone, offline.
Join the beta →

Earnest Ndichu v Veronica Wanjiru Munene [2022] KEBPRT 12 (KLR)

[2022] KEBPRT 12 (KLR) Business Premises Rent Tribunal
Read PDF
Court
Business Premises Rent Tribunal
Case number
12
Citation
[2022] KEBPRT 12 (KLR)
Decided
24 March 2022
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeLandlord and Tenant DisputePostureAppeal from a final order dismissing the application for restraining orders and allowing the application to file a reference out of timeCoramHON. GAKUHI CHEGE, VICE CHAIR, BUSINESS PREMISES RENT TRIBUNAL
Holding

The tribunal has no jurisdiction to hear the dispute and dismisses the application and reference with costs to the respondent.

Facts

The applicant, Ernest Ndichu, is a tenant on a residential plot in Nakuru Municipality, running a car wash, butchery, and Nyama choma business. He claims the landlord, Veronica Wanjiru Munene, served him with an illegal text message and has been sending threatening messages. The applicant has spent Kshs.950,000 on improvements to the property.

Issues

  1. Whether the applicant has a controlled tenancy as defined by Section 2 of Cap. 301, Laws of Kenya
  2. Whether the tribunal has jurisdiction to hear the dispute

Reasoning

The tribunal found no proof of a controlled tenancy and that the applicant took advantage of the respondent's absence to invade the suit premises.

Outcome

The application and reference are dismissed with costs to the respondent.

Orders

  • The application and reference are dismissed with costs to the respondent.
  • Ex-parte orders given on 21st September 2021 are discharged and/or vacated.
  • Respondent's costs are assessed at Kshs.25,000 against the applicant.

Authorities cited

Legislation (1)
  • Cap. 301, Laws of Kenya
Experimental AI summary generated by a language model, not a lawyer. It may contain errors or omissions and must not be relied on for legal decisions — the full judgment below is the authoritative source.
Full judgment 0.1 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case