The Lower Eastern Times Opening The Third Eye
Related Articles
A Kiambu landlord who sought to evict her tenant through the Business Premises Rent Tribunal was dealt a blow when her case was dismissed, leaving the tenant victorious and awarded legal costs.
The dispute stemmed from a notice issued on March 31, 2025, requiring the tenant to vacate by June. When he did not leave, the landlord filed an application on June 3 seeking vacant possession, police enforcement, and an injunction to stop interference with her property rights.
Click here to join our WhatsApp Channel
Although the case initially appeared straightforward, the Tribunal identified several weaknesses. The landlord claimed the tenant had been properly served with the termination notice, which was affixed to the premises, and argued his continued occupation amounted to trespass. She also dismissed his claim of improvements, saying renovations could not override her statutory rights.
The tenant countered that he was never personally served and only learned of the notice during the proceedings. He presented Mpesa statements showing rent payments for June and July 2025 that the landlord accepted, which he argued amounted to a waiver of the notice. He also produced receipts and photos of Sh450,000 worth of improvements, arguing eviction would be unjust.
Citing legal precedents, the tenant further argued that once a landlord continues to receive rent after issuing a termination notice, the notice becomes void. He also raised res judicata, noting a similar application had been filed earlier and withdrawn.
After reviewing the evidence, the Tribunal ruled that:
- Service by affixing the notice without proof was inadequate.
- The termination notice itself was defective and invalid under Cap 301.
- Acceptance of rent after the termination date nullified the notice.
- The tenant’s significant investments in improvements made eviction inequitable.
The Tribunal, however, rejected the res judicata plea since the earlier case had not been conclusively decided. It also declined to issue a mandatory injunction, finding the matter lacked the special circumstances required.
Ultimately, the landlord’s application was dismissed, the notice declared void, and the tenant shielded from eviction. The Tribunal awarded the tenant Sh15,000 in legal costs to be deducted from rent arrears.
The ruling was delivered virtually on September 26, 2025, in the tenant’s absence.
