[2018] KEHC 2788 (KLR)
The court found that the tribunal properly considered the joint valuation report, comparables, and submissions from both parties in assessing the rent. There was no evidence of exaggeration or bias in the tribunal's assessment, and the professional qualifications of the valuers were not challenged. However, the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2018] KEHC 2788 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Elijah Gitari t/a G.R. Service; Appellant: Maria Wamboi; Appellant: Micheal Ndegwa; Respondent: Ann Ngaru Waithaka
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Appeal 250 of 2012
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed with modification as to effective date of rent; each party to bear own costs
- Judges
- A Mbogholi-Msagha
- Legal Topics
- Rent Assessment, Landlord Tenant Disputes, Business Premises Tribunal, Valuation Reports
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Elijah Gitari t/a G.R. Service
Appellant
Maria Wamboi
Appellant
Micheal Ndegwa
Appellant
Ann Ngaru Waithaka
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the tribunal erred in ignoring the joint valuation report and recommendations of both parties.
- 2 Whether the tribunal failed to consider Section 9 of the Landlords and Tenant (Shops, Hotels and Catering Establishments) Act Cap 301.
- 3 Whether the tribunal assessed rent above the recommendations of the respondent's valuers.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the tribunal properly considered the joint valuation report, comparables, and submissions from both parties in assessing the rent. There was no evidence of exaggeration or bias in the tribunal's assessment, and the professional qualifications of the valuers were not challenged. However, the court agreed with the appellants that the effective date for the new rent should be the date the joint report was filed, as the delay was due to the valuers and not the parties. The appeal was dismissed on the substantive issues, but the effective date for the new rent was adjusted to September 2011.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed with modification as to effective date of rent; each party to bear own costs
Orders
- Appeal dismissed on substantive grounds.
- Effective date for new rent set as September 2011, the date the joint report was filed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
20 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 250 OF 2012
ELIJAH GITARI T/A G.R. SERVICE....................................1ST APPELLANT
MARIA WAMBOI....................................................................2ND APPELLANT
MICHEAL NDEGWA..............................................................3RD APPELLANT
VERSUS
ANN NGARU WAITHAKA.........................................................RESPONDENT
JUDGMENT
This appeal arises from the decision of the Chairperson Business Premises Tribunal delivered on 11th May, 2012. The appellants herein were tenants of the respondent in premises situated in the Central Business District of the City of Nairobi. The respondent issued notices to the appellants to increase rent which notices were contested by the appellants. The references were consolidated and in the process, the parties agreed to file joint valuation reports made by the appellants’ and the respondent’s valuers. This joint report was filed on 2nd September 2011.
Following the filing of the joint report, the tribunal proceeded to make a determination and in the judgment dated 11th May, 2012 ordered that the tenant in shop No. O – G.R. Services will pay Kshs. 25,000/= per month plus VAT, shop No. 6 – Linear fashions Kshs. 40,000/= per month. Shop No. 20 – Jacma for elegance kshs. 38,300/= and the effective date would be 1st May, 2010. The respondent was also awarded costs of the determinations.
The appellants were aggrieved by this determination and lodged this appeal. From the Memorandum of Appeal the appellant complained that the Tribunal ignored the joint valuation report on lettable area and recommendation made by both parties, and also did not take into account factors set out in Section 9 of the Landlords and tenant Act Cap 301 Laws of Kenya. The Tribunal was also faulted for not taking into account submissions made by both advocates for the parties and assessed rent that were above those recommended by the respondent’s valuers. In effect, the chairperson failed to protect the tenants from exploitation by landlords as envisaged by the preamble to the Act among other complaints.
In arriving at the said conclusion, the Chairperson addressed the reports filed by the parties herein. The Chairperson also looked at comparables used by both parties and picked the best evidence in the assessment of rent which she analysed.
As the first appellate court, I have looked at the material presented which included the reports made by the valuers and the submissions by the parties herein. I see no exaggeration in the demand by the respondent and also the assessments reached by the valuers. It is instructive to note that the professional qualifications of the valuers have not been questioned by any of the parties; if anything, they address the subject of equity, balancing the interest of both the landlord and the tenant and bearing in mind that investment in real estate should be in tandem with current trends.
After considering matters placed before the court, I am unable to disturb the judgment of the tribunal in assessment of rent. The effective date has been made an issue and I think there is merit in the complaint in that, the appellants were not to blame for the delay in the analysis which the tribunal also observed in its judgement. It is the valuers who did not submit the joint report on time and therefore, the effective date shall be the date when the joint report was filed and that is September, 2011.
The end result is that the appeal is dismissed but each party shall bear their own costs.
Orders accordingly.
Dated, signed and delivered at Nairobi this 24th day of October, 2018
A. MBOGHOLI MSAGHA
JUDGE