[2025] KEBPRT 252 (KLR)

[2025] KEBPRT 252 (KLR)

The Tribunal found that while the tenant had produced invoices and quotations for certain claims, these did not amount to strict proof of payment as required for special damages. Only the claim for Kshs. 198,800.00, supported by a bank statement evidencing payment for petrol station signage, met the evidentiary threshold. The remaining claims, including for painting works and installation of pylon signs, were not sufficiently proved due to lack of receipts or direct evidence of payment. The Tribunal also found that the tenant had sufficiently proved the refund of rent for June and July 2024 through bank transfer documents, but the landlady's assertion of reimbursement via M-Pesa was not...

Citation
[2025] KEBPRT 252 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Grenada Energy Limited; Respondent: Felista Kanini Maundu
Court
Business Premises Rent Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
17 April 2025
Case Number
Tribunal Case E002 of 2024
Procedural Posture
Tribunal Application / Ruling on Application for Review and Special Damages
Outcome
application partially allowed
Judges
A Muma
Legal Topics
Business Premises Rent, Special Damages, Proof of Payment, Landlord Tenant Disputes
Source Language
English
Land and Property Civil Procedure Business Premises Rent Special Damages Proof of Payment Landlord Tenant Disputes

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

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

Parties

Grenada Energy Limited

Applicant

Felista Kanini Maundu

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Tribunal Application / Ruling on Application for Review and Special Damages

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the tenant is entitled to special damages of Kshs. 1,463,482.00 for property destroyed and related claims.
  2. 2 Whether the tenant has strictly proved its claim for special damages as required by law.
  3. 3 Whether the alleged refund of rent by the landlady was proved and properly considered.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that while the tenant had produced invoices and quotations for certain claims, these did not amount to strict proof of payment as required for special damages. Only the claim for Kshs. 198,800.00, supported by a bank statement evidencing payment for petrol station signage, met the evidentiary threshold. The remaining claims, including for painting works and installation of pylon signs, were not sufficiently proved due to lack of receipts or direct evidence of payment. The Tribunal also found that the tenant had sufficiently proved the refund of rent for June and July 2024 through bank transfer documents, but the landlady's assertion of reimbursement via M-Pesa was not...

Court Disposition

application partially allowed

Orders

  • The landlady shall pay the tenant Kshs. 198,800.00 being the cost of installation of the petrol signage.
  • The tenant shall have costs assessed at Kshs. 30,000.00.