[2022] KEBPRT 888 (KLR)

[2022] KEBPRT 888 (KLR)

The tribunal found that the parties had negotiated and executed a letter of intent for a lease of 5 years and 3 months, which, despite the absence of a subsequent formal lease, reflected their intention to create an uncontrolled tenancy. The tribunal held that the tenancy did not fall within the definition of a...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2022] KEBPRT 888 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Jimkara Autospares Ltd; Respondent: Capacity Outsourcing (K) Ltd
Court
Business Premises Rent Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Tribunal Case E893 of 2022
Procedural Posture
Preliminary Objection / Ruling on Preliminary Objection Regarding Tribunal Jurisdiction
Outcome
preliminary objection upheld; tenant's reference and application struck out for want of jurisdiction; costs awarded to landlord
Judges
Gakuhi Chege
Legal Topics
Controlled Tenancy, Jurisdiction of Tribunal, Lease Agreements, Protected Tenancy
Source Language
en
Land and Property Controlled Tenancy Jurisdiction of Tribunal Lease Agreements Protected Tenancy

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 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jimkara Autospares Ltd

Applicant

Capacity Outsourcing (K) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Preliminary Objection / Ruling on Preliminary Objection Regarding Tribunal Jurisdiction

  1. 1 Whether the Business Premises Rent Tribunal has jurisdiction to hear the dispute based on the nature of the tenancy.
  2. 2 Whether the tenancy between the parties is a controlled tenancy under section 2(1) of the Landlord and Tenant (Shops, Hotels and Catering Establishments) Act, Cap 301.
  3. 3 Whether the absence of a formal executed lease alters the nature of the tenancy.

Ratio Decidendi

The tribunal found that the parties had negotiated and executed a letter of intent for a lease of 5 years and 3 months, which, despite the absence of a subsequent formal lease, reflected their intention to create an uncontrolled tenancy. The tribunal held that the tenancy did not fall within the definition of a controlled tenancy under section 2(1) of Cap 301. Consequently, the tribunal lacked jurisdiction to hear the dispute, and the tenant's reference and application were struck out. The tribunal emphasized that the intention and outward conduct of the parties, as evidenced by the executed letter and continued payment and acceptance of rent, established the nature of the tenancy as...

Court Disposition

preliminary objection upheld; tenant's reference and application struck out for want of jurisdiction; costs awarded to landlord

Orders

  • The landlord’s notice of preliminary objection dated October 14, 2022 is upheld.
  • The tenant’s reference and application dated September 26, 2022 is struck out with costs for want of jurisdiction.