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

Evangelical Lutheran Church & 2 others v Sucha Singh [2022] KEBPRT 89 (KLR)

[2022] KEBPRT 89 (KLR) Business Premises Rent Tribunal
Read PDF
Court
Business Premises Rent Tribunal
Case number
89
Citation
[2022] KEBPRT 89 (KLR)
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeLandlord and Tenant DisputePostureAppeal from a previous rulingCoramHON A. MUMA, VICE CHAIR, BUSINESS PREMISES RENT TRIBUNAL
Holding

The Tribunal holds that there are no grounds preventing the parties from being joined to the suit, but the same will be an action in futility for the Applicants as there are no active proceedings before the Tribunal.

Facts

The Evangelical Lutheran Church is the current tenant of a property owned by Sucha Singh. The church filed an application seeking to have the landlord restrained from interfering with its possession of the property. The landlord filed an application seeking to remove the tenant and prevent them from the property. The tenant later filed an application to join two parties as interested parties in the suit.

Issues

  1. Whether the Tribunal can grant orders sought to join the intended interested parties to the suit?
  2. Whether the Tenant is entitled to the orders sought to join the Intended Interested Parties to the suit?

Reasoning

The Tribunal dismissed the application to join the intended interested parties as there were no active proceedings before the Tribunal and the orders granted to the landlord were not set aside.

Outcome

The application to join the intended interested parties was denied.

Orders

  • The application to join the intended interested parties was denied.
  • Each party shall bear their own costs.

Authorities cited

Legislation (1)
  • Landlords and Tenants (Shops, Hotels and Catering) Establishments Act Cap 301
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