[2025] KEELC 3784 (KLR)

[2025] KEELC 3784 (KLR)

The court found that the Defendant was in substantial arrears of service charges as stipulated in the lease agreement. Clause 6.1 of the lease expressly provides that if service charges remain unpaid for 28 days, the Plaintiff is entitled to re-enter and repossess the premises, regardless of whether a formal demand...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2025] KEELC 3784 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Woburn Estate Limited; Defendant: Livio Luigi Beretta
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Malindi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Enviromental and Land Originating Summons 22 of 2022
Procedural Posture
Originating Summons / Judgment
Outcome
Plaintiff's claim allowed in its entirety; lease discharged; vesting order granted; no order as to costs.
Judges
EK Makori
Legal Topics
Lease Termination, Service Charge Arrears, Vesting Order, Forfeiture of Lease
Source Language
en
Land and Property Lease Termination Service Charge Arrears Vesting Order Forfeiture of Lease

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Woburn Estate Limited

Plaintiff

Livio Luigi Beretta

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Originating Summons / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the lease between the Plaintiff and Defendant should be discharged due to breach of clause 6.1 by the Defendant.
  2. 2 Whether a vesting order should be issued in favour of the Plaintiff for Apartment 3A of Block 3.
  3. 3 Whether the Defendant should be condemned to pay the costs of the summons.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the Defendant was in substantial arrears of service charges as stipulated in the lease agreement. Clause 6.1 of the lease expressly provides that if service charges remain unpaid for 28 days, the Plaintiff is entitled to re-enter and repossess the premises, regardless of whether a formal demand was made. The Plaintiff provided evidence of the arrears and the lease terms. The Defendant did not contest the claim or appear in court. The court held that the Plaintiff had proven its case to the required legal standard and was entitled to the reliefs sought, including discharge of the lease, a vesting order for the property, and, given the undefended nature of the claim, no...

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's claim allowed in its entirety; lease discharged; vesting order granted; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • The lease between the Plaintiff and Defendant stands discharged by virtue of breach under clause 6.1 of the lease agreement.
  • A vesting order is issued vesting Apartment 3A of Block 3 within portion number 10714 Folio 666/1596 in the name of Woburn Estate Limited.