Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCPartially AllowedNot stated in the judgment· [2023] KEELC 610 (KLR)

Petro Oil Kenya Limited v Kiraithe (Environment & Land Case 174 of 2013) [2023] KEELC 610 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
31 January 2023
7,554 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~30 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan landlord who agrees in writing to renew a lease cannot later back out, and the court ordered her to sign a fresh 20-year lease.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The plaintiff, Petro Oil Kenya Ltd, leased land parcel Kisumu/Municipality/Block 9/194 from the defendant under a lease dated May 5, 2003 for ten years, with an option to renew for a further ten years under clause 3(f) at a rent to be agreed. By notice dated August 3, 2012 the plaintiff sought renewal for twenty years; the defendant's reply of October 18, 2012 agreed to renew but proposed different rent. Failing agreement, the plaintiff invoked clause 4 of the lease, and the Chairman of the Institute of Surveyors of Kenya appointed a valuer whose report of May 17, 2013 fixed the rent. The plaintiff sued for rent determination, specific performance of the further lease, damages in the alternative, and a permanent injunction. The defendant counterclaimed for vacant possession and mesne profits, contending the lease expired on January 31, 2013 and that the plaintiff's steps were null and void. The court held that the defendant, having agreed in writing to a twenty-year renewal, could not plead non-compliance with clause 3(f); that the plaintiff had taken all steps required by the lease, including the clause 4 valuation process; and that specific performance was therefore available, applying National Oil Corporation of Kenya v Obegi Ongera and Tusker Mattress Ltd v Bank of Baroda. The plaintiff's suit was allowed in full: the May 17, 2013 valuation was adopted as the rent for the first ten-year term, specific performance of the twenty-year further lease was ordered (with execution by the Deputy Registrar on default), a permanent injunction issued, costs were awarded to the plaintiff, and the defendant's counterclaim was held not capable of being granted.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the defendant was bound by clause 3(f) of the lease to grant renewal with rent as per the May 17, 2013 valuation

Holding

Yes. The plaintiff complied with the contractual renewal mechanism, the defendant by her letter of October 18, 2012 agreed to a twenty-year renewal, and the rent dispute was properly referred to a valuer under clause 4

Reasoning

The lease contained an option to renew under clause 3(f) and a rent-determination mechanism under clause 4. The plaintiff gave notice before expiry; the defendant's reply agreed to renew for twenty years but countered on rent. Having agreed to the twenty-year renewal, the defendant could not resile from it by pleading non-compliance with clause 3(f). The plaintiff then invoked clause 4, the Chairman of the Institute of Surveyors appointed a valuer, and the resulting valuation was binding.

p. 11
02

Whether the plaintiff was entitled to specific performance and the other orders sought in the plaint

Holding

Yes. The plaintiff demonstrated all steps required by the lease and made out a case for the orders sought

Reasoning

Relying on National Oil Corporation of Kenya v Robert Obegi Ongera and Tusker Mattress Ltd v Bank of Baroda, the court held that an option to renew, once properly exercised, is enforceable by specific performance. The plaintiff had given notice, negotiated, referred the rent dispute to the nominated valuer and deposited rent with its advocates; the only remaining step was the defendant's execution of the further lease.

p. 12
03

Whether the defendant was entitled to the orders sought in her counterclaim

Holding

No. Once the plaintiff's claim succeeded, the counterclaim for vacant possession and mesne profits could not stand

Reasoning

The defendant's counterclaim rested on the premise that the lease had expired on January 31, 2013 and the plaintiff's renewal steps were null and void. The court having found a valid renewal binding the defendant, the foundation of the counterclaim fell away and its orders were not capable of being granted.

p. 12

Legal principles established

#
  • A party amenable in correspondence to renewal of a lease for a period other than that stipulated in the option clause cannot later plead non-compliance with the option clause as to that period
  • Specific performance of an option to renew is available where the claimant has done all that was required of it under the lease

Court orders

#
  1. 1.That the yearly rent determined and contained in the Report and Rental Valuation dated May 17, 2013 be the rent payable by the Plaintiff to the Defendant for the first term of 10 years of the Further Lease, and the subsequent term of ten years to be determined by a valuer nominated by the Institute
  2. 2.An order of specific performance in terms of clause 3(f) of the Lease that the Defendant execute a further lease for the extended term of twenty (20) years at the rent stipulated in sub clause (a) above but otherwise on the same terms and conditions as are contained in the lease
  3. 3.In the event the Defendant refuses or fails to execute the said further Lease within the time limited by the court, that such Further Lease be executed by the Deputy Registrar on behalf of and in the name of the Defendant
  4. 4.An order of permanent injunction restraining the defendant from interfering with the plaintiff's peaceful enjoyment of the property for the term of the Further Lease
  5. 5.Costs to the plaintiff
  6. 6.Dismissal of the defendant's counterclaim (the orders sought in the counterclaim held not capable of being granted)

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Evidence ActSection 107

Cases cited (10)

  • Housing Finance Company of Kenya Limited v Njuguna
    LLR 1176 (CCK)
  • Sita Steel Rolling Mills Ltd v Jubilee Insurance Company Limited
    [2007] eKLR
  • Serah Njeri Mwobi v John Kimani Njoroge
    [2013] eKLR
  • Chief Land Registrar & 4 others v Nathan Tirop Koech & 4 others
    [2018] eKLR
  • Zum Zum Investment Limited v Habib Bank Limited
    [2014] eKLR
  • Dr Mwangi Ngumo v Kenya Institute of Management
    Mombasa Industrial Cause No 851 of 2009
  • Fidelity Commercial Bank Limited v Kenya Grange Vehicle Industries Limited
    [2017] eKLR
  • National Oil Corporation of Kenya v Robert Obegi Ongera & another
    [2014] eKLR
  • Sands v Mutual Benefits Ltd
    [1971] EA 156
  • Tusker Mattress Ltd v Bank of Baroda (Kenya) Ltd & another
    [2017] eKLR
Jurisdiction invoked
Original civil jurisdiction of the High Court/Environment and Land Court over lease disputes; no specific provision invoked in the judgment

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Petro Oil Kenya Limited v Kiraithe (Environment & Land Case 174 of 2013) [2023] KEELC 610 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2023). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2023/610/eng@2023-01-31

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