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

Kamau t/a Victory Choma Roast v Kinyanjui; Mwangi (Interested Party) (Tribunal Case E742 of 2021) [2023] KEBPRT 1391 (KLR) (27 September 2023) (Ruling)

[2023] KEBPRT 1391 (KLR) Business Premises Rent Tribunal
Read PDF
Court
Business Premises Rent Tribunal
Case number
1391
Citation
[2023] KEBPRT 1391 (KLR)
Decided
27 September 2023
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeBusiness Premises Rent DisputePostureApplication for Review of RulingCoramA. Muma
Holding

The Review Application is dismissed due to unreasonable delay.

Facts

The Tenant, Patrick Muiruri Kamau, filed a suit against the Respondent, Boniface Kamande Kinyanjui, and an Interested Party, Stephen Mwangi. The Tribunal issued a ruling on January 17, 2023, ordering the Tenant to continue paying rent and compensate the Applicant for losses. The Applicant later filed a Notice of Motion Application seeking to set aside the ruling.

Issues

  1. Whether the Tribunal should set aside and/or quash its ruling and orders delivered on January 17, 2023.

Reasoning

The applicant failed to provide sufficient grounds for the review and the delay in filing the application is unreasonable.

Outcome

The Review Application dated 23rd January 2024 is dismissed.

Orders

  • The Review Application dated 23rd January 2024 is dismissed based on unreasonable delay.
  • Each party to bear their own costs.

Authorities cited

Legislation (3)
  • Civil Procedure Act Cap 21
  • Civil Procedure Rules, 2010
  • Order 45 Rule 1
Cases cited (2)
  • Republic v Public Procurement Administrative Review Board & 2 others [2018] eKLR
  • Stephen Gathua Kimani v Nancy Wanjira Waruingi t/a Providence Auctioneers [2016] eKLR
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