Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCDismissedMemorandum of Appeal dated 17th September 2021· [2022] KEELC 3316 (KLR)

Refrigeration Components Limited v East African Cultural Trust & Afropress Ltd (Environment and Land Appeal E076 of 2021) [2022] KEELC 3316 (KLR)

High Court of Kenya
9 June 2022
2,629 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~11 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This was a first appeal to the High Court from a decision of the Business Rent Tribunal rendered by Honourable Cyprian Mugambi Nguthari on 10th September 2021. The appellant, a tenant, had undertaken repairs to dilapidated premises in 2012 and sought to deduct repair costs from rent owed to the landlord. The Tribunal, taking the mean of two valuation reports, fixed the repair cost at Kshs 3,055,167 but allowed the landlord's amended counterclaim of Kshs 1,257,233 for restoring parts damaged by the tenant's contractors, limiting the deductible sum to Kshs 1,797,934. The appellant's six grounds of appeal challenged this computation, alleged limitation barred the counterclaim, asserted Tribunal bias, and complained about costs. The court restated the duty of a first appellate court, citing China Zhingxing Construction and Peters v Sunday Post. It declined to entertain the limitation ground, holding it was raised for the first time at submissions stage and not contained in the memorandum of appeal, applying Otieno Ragot and Kibos Sugar. On quantum, it found the restoration bill of Kshs 1,257,233 was never challenged and was properly offset, leaving Kshs 1,797,934 deductible. It found no evidence of bias and declined to disturb the Tribunal's discretionary costs order, citing United India Insurance. The appeal was dismissed in its entirety, with each party directed to equally bear their own costs of the appeal. The judgment was delivered virtually at Nairobi on 9th June 2022 by E. K. Wabwoto, Judge.

Key legal issues

#
01

Introduction of limitation ground at submissions stage

Holding

The limitation issue could not be entertained as it was not among the grounds of appeal and was raised for the first time in submissions.

Reasoning

Relying on Otieno Ragot v National Bank and Kibos Sugar, the court held that additional issues or evidence on appeal require leave of the court. Having filed its memorandum of appeal on 17th September 2021, the appellant was bound by its grounds and could not introduce the limitation issue at the submissions stage.

p. 5
02

Quantum of repair costs deductible from rent

Holding

The Tribunal correctly held the tenant entitled to defray only Kshs 1,797,934 (Kshs 3,055,167 mean repair cost less Kshs 1,257,233 restoration cost of damage caused by the tenant's contractors), not Kshs 4,296,101.

Reasoning

Two valuation reports (Mark & Ashton for the tenant at Kshs 3,268,868 and Archbil Consultants for the landlord at Kshs 2,841,467) supported a mean figure of Kshs 3,055,167. The consultants' bill of Kshs 1,257,233 for restoring parts damaged by the tenant's contractors, which the tenant never repaired and never challenged, was properly offset against the deduction.

03

Alleged bias and award of costs

Holding

No evidence of bias was found; the refusal to award costs was a proper exercise of discretion.

Reasoning

The court perused the entire record and the Tribunal's judgment and found no substantiation of bias. On costs, guided by United India Insurance v East African Underwriters, an appellate court will not interfere with a discretionary costs decision merely because it might have weighed the factors differently.

p. 5

Legal principles established

#
  • On a first appeal the court must reconsider and re-evaluate the evidence and draw its own conclusions, while allowing for the trial court's advantage of seeing and hearing witnesses
  • A party cannot introduce new issues or evidence on appeal at submissions stage without leave of the court
  • An appellate court will not interfere with a discretionary decision merely because it would have exercised the discretion differently

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Appeal dismissed
  2. 2.Each party to equally bear their own costs of the Appeal

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Landlord and Tenant (Business Premises) ActPreamble (Cap 301)
  • Limitation of Actions Act

Cases cited (6)

  • China Zhingxing Construction Company Ltd v Ann Akuru Sophia
    [2020] eKLR
  • Peters v Sunday Post Limited
    [1958] EA 424
  • Watt v Thomas
    [1947] A.C. 484
  • Otieno Ragot and Co. Advocates v National Bank of Kenya
    C.A. No 60 and 62 of 2017 at Kisumu
  • Kibos Sugar & Allied Industries Limited and Another v Benson Ambuti Adega & 6 others
    Civil Appeal No 153 of 2019
  • United India Insurance Co. Ltd v East African Undermites [Kenya] Ltd
    [1985] EA 898
On appeal from
Business Rent Tribunal
Jurisdiction invoked
First appellate jurisdiction over the Business Rent Tribunal under the Landlord and Tenant (Business Premises) Act, Cap 301

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Refrigeration Components Limited v East African Cultural Trust & Afropress Ltd (Environment and Land Appeal E076 of 2021) [2022] KEELC 3316 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2022). Memorandum of Appeal dated 17th September 2021. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2022/3316/eng@2022-06-09

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.