[2023] KEET 45 (KLR)

[2023] KEET 45 (KLR)

The Tribunal determined that, in line with the Energy Act, 2019 and the Energy (Complaints and Disputes Resolution) Regulations, 2012, it lacks jurisdiction to entertain disputes over electricity billing and threatened disconnection until the parties have first referred the matter to the Energy and Petroleum...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2023] KEET 45 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Hebron Orucho Gisebe; Plaintiff: Tanzil Cakes Ltd; Respondent: Kenya Power and Lighting Company
Court
Energy & Petroleum Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Tribunal Case E004 of 2023
Procedural Posture
Directions / Reference to Regulatory Authority
Outcome
Dispute referred to the Energy and Petroleum Regulatory Authority (EPRA) for resolution; Tribunal declines jurisdiction at this stage.
Judges
Kioko Kilukumi, D.K Mwirigi, B.H Wasioya, F.S Ibrahim, F. M Kavita
Legal Topics
Energy Regulation, Regulatory Jurisdiction, Billing Disputes
Source Language
en
Administrative Law Commercial and Corporate Energy Regulation Regulatory Jurisdiction Billing 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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hebron Orucho Gisebe

Plaintiff

Tanzil Cakes Ltd

Plaintiff

Kenya Power and Lighting Company

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Directions / Reference to Regulatory Authority

  1. 1 Whether the Tribunal has jurisdiction to determine disputes over electricity billing prior to exhaustion of remedies before the Energy and Petroleum Regulatory Authority (EPRA).
  2. 2 Whether the dispute should be referred to EPRA for resolution under the Energy Act, 2019 and relevant regulations.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal determined that, in line with the Energy Act, 2019 and the Energy (Complaints and Disputes Resolution) Regulations, 2012, it lacks jurisdiction to entertain disputes over electricity billing and threatened disconnection until the parties have first referred the matter to the Energy and Petroleum Regulatory Authority (EPRA). The Tribunal relied on its previous decision in the Kai appeal, which established that exhaustion of the regulatory dispute resolution process is a mandatory prerequisite. Accordingly, the Tribunal declined to exercise jurisdiction and referred the dispute to EPRA for resolution, emphasizing the statutory framework that governs such disputes and the need...

Court Disposition

Dispute referred to the Energy and Petroleum Regulatory Authority (EPRA) for resolution; Tribunal declines jurisdiction at this stage.

Orders

  • The dispute is referred to EPRA for resolution in accordance with the Energy Act, 2019 and relevant regulations.
  • The Tribunal declines to exercise jurisdiction pending exhaustion of the regulatory process.