The Tribunal upheld a landlord’s notice to terminate a controlled tenancy for renovation, finding the tenants had long notice and no convincing reason to delay vacating.
The court granted a conditional stay of execution pending appeal, requiring the appellant to provide a bank guarantee of the decretal sum within 30 days.
Rongai Rhumba House Limited v Ariwi & 8 others [2025] KEELC 4236 (KLR)
Court
Environment and Land Court
Case number
Civil Suit E131 of 2024
Judge
MD Mwangi
The court found that the preliminary objection raised by the 1st Defendant did not meet the threshold established in Mukisa Biscuit, as it required the court to investigate facts not currently before it, including previous proceedings, pleadings, and evidence. The determination of res judicata necessitates examination of the parties, cause of action, and prior decisions, which cannot be resolved on a pure point of law at the preliminary stage. Therefore, the objection was not properly raised as a preliminary objection and was dismissed with costs to the Plaintiff.
Mbau v Mahiga Produce & Co. Ltd [2025] KEBPRT 297 (KLR)
Court
Business Premises Rent Tribunal
Case number
Tribunal Case E096 of 2023
Judges
N Wahome, Joyce Murigi
The Tribunal found that the further amended notice of motion dated 1/12/2023 was not properly before the court as it was neither uploaded to the court's system nor was there evidence that leave had been sought or granted for its filing, as required by Order 8 Rule 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules. The pleadings had already closed prior to its filing, and the Tribunal could only consider applications properly on record. Furthermore, the claim for Kshs.220,323.52 was not specifically pleaded in the reference or the amended motion and was not proved. Applying the principle from Hahn v Singh, the T…
Wachira v Karaba & 2 others [2025] KEBPRT 260 (KLR)
Court
Business Premises Rent Tribunal
Case number
Tribunal Case E1019 of 2024
Judges
J Osodo, Gakuhi Chege
The Tribunal dismissed a tenant’s application for interpretation and further relief, holding that the issues had already been finally determined and were res judicata.
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 t…
The tribunal struck out a tenant’s application for lack of a supporting affidavit despite prior directions to file one, and awarded costs to the respondent.
Murago t/a Indosteel Hardware v Kamuchinde Company Limited & another [2025] KEBPRT 24 (KLR)
Court
Business Premises Rent Tribunal
Case number
Tribunal Case E788 of 2024
Judges
N Wahome, Joyce Murigi
The Tribunal allowed the tenant’s withdrawal of a reference and motion, but found the filing conduct abusive and awarded the landlord Kshs. 30,000 in costs.