[2022] KEBPRT 63 (KLR)

[2022] KEBPRT 63 (KLR)

The tribunal found that the applicant admitted to being in rent arrears and did not provide sufficient evidence of a binding agreement for payment of arrears in instalments. The respondents' right to levy distress for rent was legally exercised under Section 3 of the Distress for Rent Act. Since the applicant was in...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2022] KEBPRT 63 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Beatrice Monyani Elam; Respondent: Rukia Tristar Properties Ltd; Respondent: Sure Auctioneers Ltd
Court
Business Premises Rent Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Tribunal Case E052 of 2021
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Interlocutory Injunction Application
Outcome
application dismissed with costs to the respondents
Legal Topics
Distress for Rent, Injunctive Relief, Rent Arrears, Landlord Tenant Disputes
Source Language
en
Land and Property Civil Procedure Distress for Rent Injunctive Relief Rent Arrears Landlord Tenant Disputes

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Beatrice Monyani Elam

Applicant

Rukia Tristar Properties Ltd

Respondent

Sure Auctioneers Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Interlocutory Injunction Application

  1. 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to injunctive relief restraining the respondents from interfering with her occupation of the premises.
  2. 2 Whether the respondents' exercise of distress for rent was lawful under the circumstances.

Ratio Decidendi

The tribunal found that the applicant admitted to being in rent arrears and did not provide sufficient evidence of a binding agreement for payment of arrears in instalments. The respondents' right to levy distress for rent was legally exercised under Section 3 of the Distress for Rent Act. Since the applicant was in arrears, she was not entitled to equitable relief by way of injunction. Furthermore, the orders sought were only pending the hearing of the application inter partes, and no substantive orders were sought pending the determination of the complaint. The application was therefore found to lack merit and was dismissed with costs to the respondents.

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs to the respondents

Orders

  • The application dated 9th September 2021 is dismissed with costs to the respondents.