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

Ngaruiya v Kariuki (Tribunal Case E006 of 2023) [2024] KEBPRT 80 (KLR) (2 February 2024) (Ruling)

[2024] KEBPRT 80 (KLR) Business Premises Rent Tribunal
Read PDF
Court
Business Premises Rent Tribunal
Case number
80
Citation
[2024] KEBPRT 80 (KLR)
Decided
2 February 2024
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeTribunal CasePostureTenant's application for orders regarding compensation and costsCoramHON. GAKUHI CHEGE, HON. JOYCE OSODO
Holding

The Tribunal allows the tenant's application and orders compensation for improvements and losses, and any other issues between the parties will be heard together.

Facts

The tenant, Amos Kariuki Ngaruiya, sought orders from the Tribunal to hear and determine a reference even after the lease expired. The tenant claimed compensation for losses and improvements made, while the landlord disputed the claims and argued for jurisdiction in a civil court.

Issues

  1. Jurisdiction of the Tribunal after lease expiration
  2. Compensation for improvements and losses incurred

Reasoning

The Tribunal found that the landlord's argument for jurisdiction in a civil court was not valid, and it has the power to hear the post-tenancy disputes under the Landlord and Tenant (Shops, Hotels and Catering Establishments) Act.

Outcome

Tenant's application allowed

Orders

  • Tenant's application dated 25th May 2023 is allowed in terms of prayer 1 thereof
  • Prayer 2 thereof shall be determined together with the reference dated 19th January 2023 and any other issues between the parties herein
  • Costs of the application shall abide the outcome of the reference

Remedies

  • Compensation for improvements and losses

Authorities cited

Legislation (2)
  • Landlord and Tenant (Shops, Hotels and Catering Establishments) Act
  • Laws of Kenya
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