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

Camp Zodiac Africa Group Limited v Awuor & another (Tribunal Case E154 of 2022) [2023] KEBPRT 1202 (KLR) (Civ) (26 May 2023) (Ruling)

[2023] KEBPRT 1202 (KLR) Business Premises Rent Tribunal
Read PDF
Court
Business Premises Rent Tribunal
Case number
1202
Citation
[2023] KEBPRT 1202 (KLR)
Decided
26 May 2023
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeTribunal CasePostureApplication for Injunction and CompensationCoramCYPRIAN N. MUGAMBI
Holding

The court allowed the tenant's application in terms of prayer 3 and 4 thereof and ordered that the matter be fixed for hearing of the reference on a priority basis.

Facts

The tenant, Camp Zodiac Africa Group Limited, sought an injunction against the landlords, Angela Awuor and Penina Atieno, to prevent them from interfering with the tenant's quiet possession of the tenancy premises. The tenant claimed that the landlords had issued two notices to vacate the premises, which were found to be invalid. The tenant also claimed compensation for improvements made to the premises.

Issues

  1. Whether the tenant is entitled to the orders of injunction sought in the application
  2. Whether the landlords are obligated to issue a proper notice and compensate the tenant for improvements

Reasoning

The court found the landlords' notices invalid and noted that the relationship between the parties was governed by a controlled tenancy. The court also stated that the issue of whether the tenant carried out renovations and is entitled to compensation for them would be dealt with at the full hearing of the reference.

Outcome

The tenant's application was granted.

Orders

  • Ordering the landlords to be restrained from interfering with the tenant's quiet possession of the tenancy premises
  • Ordering the matter to be fixed for hearing of the reference on a priority basis

Remedies

  • Injunction
  • Compensation for improvements
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