Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCDismissed· [2025] KEELC 5985 (KLR)

Consolidated Bank Kenya Ltd v Chedders Investment Limited (Environment and Land Appeal E048 of 2022) [2025] KEELC 5985 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
10 September 2025
1,384 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~6 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A signed offer letter that expired in seven days did not create a written lease, so the tenancy remained controlled and within the Rent Tribunal's jurisdiction.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The appellant, dissatisfied with a ruling of Hon Patricia May, Vice Chairperson of the Business Premises Rent Tribunal, delivered on 25th May 2022, filed a memorandum of appeal dated 22nd June 2022. It argued that a signed offer letter dated 25th January 2019 constituted a written tenancy for six years, that the tenancy was therefore not a controlled tenancy, and that the tribunal lacked jurisdiction, having failed to uphold the sanctity of contract. The appellant sought to have the tribunal's decision set aside, a declaration that the offer letter was binding and the tenancy uncontrolled, and costs. The respondent countered that clauses 21 and 23 of the offer letter meant only an executed lease could create a written tenancy; the offer having lapsed, the tenancy was controlled and within the tribunal's jurisdiction. The court, hearing the matter as a first appeal, restated that it could revisit the evidence but would not disturb findings of fact unless based on no evidence, a misapprehension of it, or wrong principles. It agreed with the tribunal that the offer was to exist for only 7 days and that there was no evidence of any executed lease to solidify it, so the subsequent relationship was a periodic tenancy within the tribunal's jurisdiction. The appeal was dismissed with each party bearing its own costs.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the signed offer letter constituted a tenancy in writing / valid lease

Holding

No - the offer was to exist for 7 days and no lease was subsequently executed to solidify it

Reasoning

The court read the offer letter and noted that by its terms it was to exist for only 7 days. Apart from the offer letter there was no evidence on the record of any lease entered into by the parties. The tribunal's interpretation that the subsequent relationship was a periodic tenancy was therefore correct and adopted.

p. 3
02

Whether the tribunal had jurisdiction over the tenancy

Holding

Yes - the tenancy being periodic and not reduced into writing, it was a controlled tenancy within the tribunal's jurisdiction

Reasoning

Because the offer lapsed and no written lease was executed, the tenancy fell within the meaning of a controlled tenancy under Section 2 of Cap 301. The tribunal correctly dealt with jurisdiction first and properly found it had jurisdiction over the resulting periodic tenancy.

p. 3

Legal principles established

#
  • On a first appeal, the court is entitled to revisit the evidence, evaluate it and arrive at its own conclusion, but will not interfere with findings of fact unless based on no evidence, on a misapprehension of it, or on wrong principles
  • An offer of lease that lapses by its own terms, with no executed lease to solidify it, leaves the subsequent relationship a periodic tenancy within the tribunal's jurisdiction

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The memorandum of appeal dated 22nd June, 2022 is dismissed
  2. 2.Each party to bear its own costs

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Landlord and Tenant (Shops, Hotels and Catering Establishments) Act (Cap 301)Section 2(1)

Cases cited (7)

  • Diamond Homes Limited v Shapi
    (Civil Appeal 118 of 2021) [2024] KECA 1161 (KLR) (20 September 2024)
  • Restore and Renew Wellness Group Limited v Tradeline Express Company Limited & another
    (Environment & Land Case E129 of 2023) [2024] KEELC 75 (KLR) (15 January 2024)
  • Owners of The Motor Vessel "Lillian S" v Caltex Oil (Kenya) Ltd
    (Civil Appeal 50 of 1989) [1989] KECA 48 (KLR) (17 November 1989)
  • Samuel Kamau Macharia v Kenya Commercial Bank & 2 Others
    [2012] eKLR
  • Bakery Ltd v Westlands Security Ltd
    (Civil Appeal No. 2 of 1978)
  • Amina Karama v Njagi Gachangua & 3 others
    [2020] KEELC 186 (KLR)
  • Mwanasokoni versus Kenya Bus Service Ltd
    1982-88 1 KAR 278
On appeal from
Business Premises Rent Tribunal (Hon Patricia May, Vice Chairperson)
Not stated
Jurisdiction invoked
First appeal from the Business Premises Rent Tribunal under the Landlord and Tenant (Shops, Hotels and Catering Establishments) Act (Cap 301)

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Consolidated Bank Kenya Ltd v Chedders Investment Limited (Environment and Land Appeal E048 of 2022) [2025] KEELC 5985 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). . Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/5985/eng@2025-09-10

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