[2024] KEBPRT 688 (KLR)
The Tribunal found that the letter of offer, duly executed by the tenant, constituted a binding written agreement for a lease term of six years commencing 1 May 2022. There was no provision for termination otherwise than for breach of covenant. Under Section 2(1) of the Landlord and Tenant (Shops, Hotels and...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2024] KEBPRT 688 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Kingoina Obuya Advocates; Respondent: National Fund for the Disabled of Kenya Registered Trustees; Respondent: Garam Investments Auctioneers
- Court
- Business Premises Rent Tribunal
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Tribunal Case E064 of 2024
- Procedural Posture
- Preliminary Objection / Ruling on Preliminary Objection
- Outcome
- preliminary objection upheld; reference dismissed for want of jurisdiction
- Judges
- CN Mugambi
- Legal Topics
- Controlled Tenancy, Jurisdiction of Tribunal, Written Tenancy Agreement
- 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
Kingoina Obuya Advocates
Applicant
National Fund for the Disabled of Kenya Registered Trustees
Respondent
Garam Investments Auctioneers
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Preliminary Objection / Ruling on Preliminary Objection
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Business Premises Rent Tribunal has jurisdiction to hear the dispute given the existence of a written tenancy agreement exceeding five years.
- 2 Whether the tenancy in question qualifies as a controlled tenancy under Section 2(1) of the Landlord and Tenant (Shops, Hotels and Catering Establishments) Act, Cap 301.
Ratio Decidendi
The Tribunal found that the letter of offer, duly executed by the tenant, constituted a binding written agreement for a lease term of six years commencing 1 May 2022. There was no provision for termination otherwise than for breach of covenant. Under Section 2(1) of the Landlord and Tenant (Shops, Hotels and Catering Establishments) Act, Cap 301, such a tenancy is not a controlled tenancy. Consequently, the Tribunal held that it lacked jurisdiction to hear and determine the dispute, as the matter did not fall within the statutory definition of a controlled tenancy. The applicant's reference was dismissed for want of jurisdiction, and costs were awarded to the respondents.
Court Disposition
preliminary objection upheld; reference dismissed for want of jurisdiction
Orders
- The Tenant's Reference is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
- The Tenant will bear the costs of the Reference and the Application.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
24 paragraphs
Kingoina Obuya Advocates v National Fund for the Disabled of Kenya Registered Trustees & another (Tribunal Case E064 of 2024) [2024] KEBPRT 688 (KLR) (Civ) (27 March 2024) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2024] KEBPRT 688 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Business Premises Rent Tribunal
Civil
Tribunal Case E064 of 2024
CN Mugambi, Member
March 27, 2024
Between
Kingoina Obuya Advocates
Applicant
and
National Fund for the Disabled of Kenya Registered Trustees
1st Respondent
Garam Investments Auctioneers
2nd Respondent
Ruling
1. The notice of Preliminary objection by the Landlord dated 31. 1.2024 is brought on the grounds;a.That this court lacks jurisdiction to hear this matter or grant the orders sought as the landlord and the Tenant have a written tenancy agreement for a period in excess of five years.b.That the tenancy is therefore not a controlled tenancy within the meaning of Section 2(1) of the Landlord and Tenant (Shops, Hotels and Catering Establishments) Act Cap 301 of the Laws of Kenya.
2. I have seen the letter of offer addressed to the Tenant by the Landlord dated 16. 3.2022. The lease term in the said letter of offer is six years commencing 1. 5.2022. The letter of offer sets out the covenant between the parties and at clause 17 thereof, the letter of offer provides as follows;-“Standard Lease“The lease will be on the terms of the landlord’s Standard lease. A copy of the Standard lease which includes the terms referred to in this letter in addition to the Standard clauses set out therein shall be deemed to have been accepted on your signature hereunder and is attached hereto. Until such time as the Standard lease has been executed and registered, all covenants, conditions and the rent agreed shall be deemed to have been incorporated in this offer.”
3. Clause 20(b) of the lease titled Acceptanceprovides as follows;-This offer shall only be accepted on the following terms:-(b)Until such time as the Standard lease has been executed and registered, all covenants and conditions in the lease and rent agreed by you shall be deemed to have been incorporated in this letter.”
4. The Tenant duly accepted the terms and conditions set out in the letter of offer by appending his signature to the Tenant’s acceptance of offer and the Tenant’s confirmation/statement on 18. 3.2022.
5. The letter of offer once executed by the Tenant in signing his acceptance thereof, formed a binding agreement between the parties even as the Standard lease had not been executed.
6. The lease period being one for the period of six years and there being no provision for termination otherwise than for breach of covenant, I do find that the tenancy between the parties herein is not a controlled tenancy.Consequently, the Tribunal has no jurisdiction to hear and determine this dispute. The Tenant’s Reference is accordingly dismissed for want of jurisdiction. The Tenant will bear the costs of the Reference and the Application.
RULING DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED VIRTUALLY THIS 27TH DAY OF MARCH, 2024. HON. CYPRIAN MUGAMBIMEMBERBUSINESS PREMISES RENT TRIBUNALDelivered in the presence of;Mr. Billing for the RespondentsMr. Amenya for the Tenant