Onditi v Ochola (Tribunal Case E030 of 2022) [2023] KEBPRT 84 (KLR) (Civ) (21 February 2023) (Ruling)
- Court
- Business Premises Rent Tribunal
- Case number
- 84
- Citation
- [2023] KEBPRT 84 (KLR)
- Decided
- 21 February 2023
AI Summary
Beta
Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeTribunal CasePostureRespondent's preliminary objection to tenant's complaint and main suitCoramGAKUHI CHEGE, VICE CHAIR
Holding
The Tribunal's jurisdiction to punish for contempt of court is lacking due to the absence of a landlord and tenant relationship.
Facts
The tenant, Rastus G. Onditi, vacated the suit premises and the respondent, Wilson O. Ochola, issued a termination notice. The tenant moved the Tribunal seeking contempt of court for non-compliance with interim injunction orders.
Issues
- Tenant's vacated status
- Tribunal's jurisdiction to punish for contempt
Reasoning
The tenant vacated the premises, and the Tribunal's jurisdiction is based on the existence of a landlord and tenant relationship, which is absent in this case.
Outcome
Tenant's complaint and all proceedings are struck out with costs to the respondent.
Orders
- Tenant's complaint and all proceedings are struck out with costs to the respondent.
Authorities cited
Legislation (2)
- Section 12(2) of Cap. 301, Laws of Kenya
- Section 5(1) of the Judicature Act, Cap. 9, Laws of Kenya
Cases cited (3)
- Owners of Motor Vessel Lilian S v Caltex Oil (Kenya) Ltd [1989] eKLR
- Pritam v Ratilal [1972] EA 560
- Republic v Chairman Business Premises Rent Tribunal ex-parte Premchand Shah [2012] 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.
Loading judgment…