Africa v Northwest Offshore Limited & another [2025] KEBPRT 309 (KLR)

Africa v Northwest Offshore Limited & another (Tribunal Case E082 of 2025) [2025] KEBPRT 309 (KLR) (12 June 2025) (Ruling)

Neutral citation: [2025] KEBPRT 309 (KLR)

Republic of Kenya

In the Business Premises Rent Tribunal

Tribunal Case E082 of 2025

CN Mugambi, Chair

June 12, 2025

Between

Monks Medicare Africa

Applicant

and

Northwest Offshore Limited

1st Respondent

Dollar Auctions

2nd Respondent

Ruling

1. The Complaint in this matter is dated 17. 1.2025 and is to the effect that the Landlord has instructed Auctioneers to proclaim the Tenant’s goods without any justification. The Tenant also complains that the proclamation notice is based on inflated/exaggerated rent arrears. The Tenant therefore sought the Tribunal’s intervention in preventing the Respondents from continuing with their illegal actions.

2. The Tenant has also filed a motion dated 17. 1.2025 wherein it has sought restraining orders against the Respondents.

3. The 1st Respondent has challenged the jurisdiction of the Tribunal to hear and determine this matter and that being the case, I will have to determine the issue of whether or not the Tribunal has the jurisdiction to hear and determine this matter before proceeding further.

4. The lease agreement between the Tenant and Agricultural Holdings Ltd is the one dated 1. 03. 2023, it is apparent that the Respondents are the agent of the Landlord and the Auctioneers respectively and they are strictly speaking not the Landlords of the premises.The said lease agreement is for a period of six (6) years commencing “1st day of March Two Thousand and Two, i.e 1. 3.2002. I think this is a typographical error for the reason that an agreement for six years dated 1. 3.2023 cannot be said to have commenced twenty-one years in the past. I think the parties intended the date of 1. 3.2023 or 1. 3.2022. This position is further fortified by the Tenant’s statement of account that shows that the Tenant started paying rent on 29. 9.2022. Either way, the lease agreement is still live as the six years would have lapsed in the year 2028 or 2029 as the case may be.

5. The Tenant does not dispute that the said lease exists save where he states at paragraph 7 of his further affidavit as follows;-“That the claim of a six year fixed lease is not dispositive of the nature of the tenancy particularly where there has been no registration of the lease and where the parties have not acted strictly in accordance with the written lease.”

6. I do not think the registration of the lease and the compliance with the terms thereof are ingredients of a controlled tenancy. A controlled tenancy has been clearly defined/described at Section 2 of Cap 301 as a tenancy of a shop, hotel or catering establishmenta.Which has not been reduced into writing orb.Which has been reduced into writing and whichi.Is for a period not exceeding five years orii.Contains provision for termination otherwise than for breach of covenant within five years from the commitment thereof oriii.Relates to premises of a class specified under subsection (2) of this Section.

7. The lease agreement between the Tenant and Agricultural Holdings Ltd is one for a period of six (6) years and does not contain the provision for termination under Section 2(b)(ii) of the Act, Cap 301. Clearly therefore, the Tribunal has no jurisdiction to hear and determine this matter and consequently, the same is hereby struck out for want of jurisdiction.

8. The Tenant will bear the costs of the suit.

DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED VIRTUALLY AT NAIROBI THIS 12TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025HON. CYPRIAN MUGAMBICHAIRPERSONBUSINESS PREMISES RENT TRIBUNALDelivered in the presence of Mr. Nicholas/for the Tenant and in the absence of the landlord