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

Sankale v Karasha (Tribunal Case E415 of 2022) [2022] KEBPRT 717 (KLR) (16 September 2022) (Ruling)

[2022] KEBPRT 717 (KLR) Business Premises Rent Tribunal
Read PDF
Court
Business Premises Rent Tribunal
Case number
717
Citation
[2022] KEBPRT 717 (KLR)
Decided
16 September 2022
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeTribunal CasePostureApplication for restraining orders and temporary injunctionCoramGAKUHI CHEGE, VICE CHAIR
Holding

The Tribunal dismissed the application, finding that the applicant has not shown a prima facie case and that the Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to stay or suspend the proceedings.

Facts

Alfred Karasha Sankale, the applicant, filed a reference against Simon Joseph Karasha, the respondent, seeking restraining orders and a temporary injunction against eviction from the suit premises Laiser Farmers Bar and Restaurant. The applicant claims he is the rightful owner of the premises and has moved the court of appeal to declare him so. The respondent contends he is the registered proprietor and has terminated the tenancy.

Issues

  1. Whether the applicant is entitled to the reliefs sought in the application dated 16th May 2022.
  2. Who is liable to pay costs.

Reasoning

The Tribunal applied the principles for issuance of a temporary injunction, stating that the applicant must show a prima facie case with a probability of success and that an injunction will not normally be granted unless the applicant might otherwise suffer irreparable injury. The Tribunal concluded that the applicant has not shown a prima facie case.

Outcome

The application was dismissed.

Authorities cited

Cases cited (1)
  • Locus Classicus case of Giella vs Cassman Brown & Co. Ltd (1973) EA 358
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 0.2 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case