[2024] KEBPRT 824 (KLR)
The tribunal found that the landlord's notice to increase rent was not issued in compliance with Section 4(2) of Cap 301, rendering it invalid and unenforceable. The tribunal further held that the applicant had established a prima facie case for the grant of interlocutory relief, as she faced imminent threats of...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2024] KEBPRT 824 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Tabitha Gathoni Mureithi; Respondent: Mirriam Wanjiku; Respondent: City & County Housing Agencies
- Court
- Business Premises Rent Tribunal
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Tribunal Case E516 of 2024
- Procedural Posture
- Tribunal Application / Ruling on Interlocutory Application
- Outcome
- Application and complaint allowed.
- Judges
- CN Mugambi
- Legal Topics
- Business Premises Tenancy, Rent Increase Disputes, Interlocutory Injunctions
- 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
Tabitha Gathoni Mureithi
Applicant
Mirriam Wanjiku
Respondent
City & County Housing Agencies
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Tribunal Application / Ruling on Interlocutory Application
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the landlord's notice to increase rent was valid under Cap 301.
- 2 Whether the applicant is entitled to interlocutory orders restraining the respondents from interfering with her tenancy.
- 3 Whether the applicant should be granted access to the premises and protected from eviction pending hearing.
Ratio Decidendi
The tribunal found that the landlord's notice to increase rent was not issued in compliance with Section 4(2) of Cap 301, rendering it invalid and unenforceable. The tribunal further held that the applicant had established a prima facie case for the grant of interlocutory relief, as she faced imminent threats of eviction and unlawful interference with her tenancy. Accordingly, the tribunal allowed the application and complaint, restraining the respondents from increasing rent, interfering with the applicant's occupation, or letting out the premises to another tenant, and ordered that the applicant be granted access to the premises pending the hearing of the case.
Court Disposition
Application and complaint allowed.
Orders
- Respondents are restrained from increasing the monthly rent from Kshs. 3,000 to Kshs. 5,000 pending hearing.
- Respondents are restrained from letting out the suit premises to another tenant pending hearing.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
24 paragraphs
Mureithi v Wanjiku & another (Tribunal Case E516 of 2024) [2024] KEBPRT 824 (KLR) (19 June 2024) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2024] KEBPRT 824 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Business Premises Rent Tribunal
Tribunal Case E516 of 2024
CN Mugambi, Chair
June 19, 2024
Between
Tabitha Gathoni Mureithi
Applicant
and
Mirriam Wanjiku
1st Respondent
City & County Housing Agencies
2nd Respondent
Ruling
1. The Tenant/Applicant’s Application dated 30. 04. 2024 seeks the following orders;-a.That the Respondent be ordered to allow the Tenant unlimited access to the business premises without hindrance pending the hearing of this case.b.That the Respondent be restrained from letting out the suit premises to another Tenant pending the hearing of this case.c.That the Landlord be restrained from increasing the monthly rent from Kshs. 3,000/= to Kshs. 5,000/= or from in any other way interfering with the Tenant’s occupation and lawful use of the suit premises.d.That the OCS Kangema police station do assist in the compliance with the orders.
2. The Tenant has deponed in his supporting affidavit that he has been paying the monthly rent of Kshs. 3,000/= since 2018 and that the Landlord has now expressed an intention to increase the rent to Kshs. 5,000/= without following the right procedure.
3. The Tenant has further deponed that the Respondents have threatened to evict her from the suit premises.
4. The Tenant’s complaint is also to the effect that the Landlord has threatened to illegally increase the monthly rent contrary to the provisions of Cap 301 of the Laws of Kenya.
5. I have perused the Landlord’s notice for rent increment for shop No. 56 (the suit premises) dated 01. 01. 2024. The said notice is not issued in compliance with the provisions of Section 4(2) of Cap 301 and is therefore invalid and of no legal effect.
6. In these circumstances, I do find merit in the Application and the Complaint by the Tenant and proceed to allow the Application as prayed. The Complaint by the Tenant is also allowed in the same terms.
7. The Tenant will have the costs of the Application and the Complaint.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED VIRTUALLY THIS 19TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024. HON. CYPRIAM MUGAMBICHAIRPERSONBUSINESS PREMISES RENT TRIBUNALDelivered in the presence of;Ms. Mureithi the Tenant- present in personMr. Daniel Waweru for the Respondents