Njogu v Mungai (Tribunal Case E1151 of 2025) [2025] KEBPRT 434 (KLR) (5 December 2025) (Ruling)
- Court
- Business Premises Rent Tribunal
- Case number
- 434
- Citation
- [2025] KEBPRT 434 (KLR)
- Decided
- 5 December 2025
AI Summary
Beta
Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeTribunal CasePostureRespondent's Preliminary Objection upheldCoramHON. GAKUHI CHEGE, HON. JOYCE AKINYI OSODO
Holding
The tenancy was not a controlled tenancy, expired by euxion of time, and no mutually executed renewal capable of invoking Cap 301 has been demonstrated.
Facts
The Applicant and Respondent entered into a written lease agreement for a seven-year term, which expired on August 4, 2025. The Respondent argued the lease was not a controlled tenancy due to its duration exceeding five years.
Issues
- Whether the tenancy is a controlled tenancy under Cap 301
- Jurisdiction of the Tribunal
Reasoning
The Tribunal found the lease to be for a period exceeding five years, thus not constituting a controlled tenancy. The Respondent's arguments were upheld, and the Reference and Notice of Motion were struck out.
Outcome
The Respondent's Preliminary Objection is upheld, and the Reference and Notice of Motion are struck out.
Orders
- The Reference and Notice of Motion are struck out for want of jurisdiction
Remedies
- The Tenant shall meet the costs of the reference assessed at Kshs 30,000/= awarded to the Landlord/Respondent
Authorities cited
Legislation (2)
- Cap 301
- Land Act, 2012
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…