Naku Modern Feeds Limited v Mzee t/a Shamzi Saloon Barber Shop & SPA (Environment and Land Appeal E064 of 2024) [2025] KEELC 6201 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Nakuru court paused the part of a Tribunal order letting a tenant stay in premises she had already vacated, but refused to touch the landlord's contempt conviction.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the application was filed without unreasonable delay
The delay of over nine months from the ruling to the application was not inordinate given the unique circumstances, including the appeal being filed in time and the parties being engaged in contempt proceedings
The ruling was delivered on 19th July 2024 and the application filed on 21st May 2025, over nine months later. However, the Memorandum of Appeal was filed in time and the Respondent had engaged the Appellant in the High Court in contempt proceedings during that period. The court held that delay must be assessed case by case and found the delay not inordinate in the unique circumstances.
Whether the court can stay the order allowing the Respondent to remain in the demised premises
Yes - the limb of the ruling allowing the tenant to remain was stayed because the Respondent had voluntarily vacated before the ruling was delivered
The ruling had two limbs: allowing the tenant to remain pending the Reference, and payment of uncontested rent arrears. Since the Respondent admitted vacating the premises before the ruling, the court stayed the first limb pending the appeal, which contests the legality of the Tribunal issuing a ruling after the tenant vacated.
Whether the court can stay the contempt proceedings and conviction in the High Court
No - the court lacks jurisdiction to stay the High Court contempt proceedings
Both parties admitted the Respondent filed Nakuru High Court Misc. Application No. E0305 of 2024 and the Appellant was found in contempt. The court held that staying those proceedings would amount to sitting on appeal over a High Court matter; the Appellant must use the proper procedures for setting aside such orders.
Legal principles established
#- What amounts to unreasonable/inordinate delay depends on the circumstances of each case; applicants seeking stay must act expeditiously
- An ELC hearing an appeal from the Rent Tribunal cannot stay contempt proceedings emanating from the High Court
Court orders
#- 1.Stay of the order allowing the Respondent to remain on the demised premises, having voluntarily vacated, pending the hearing and determination of the Appeal
- 2.Costs to abide by the outcome of the Appeal
- On appeal from
- Business Premises Rent Tribunal (BPRT), Nakuru
- Nakuru BPRT Case No. E176 of 2023
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Appeals from the Rent Tribunals lie in the Environment and Land Court; stay of execution sought under Order 42 Rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Rules
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Naku Modern Feeds Limited v Mzee t/a Shamzi Saloon Barber Shop & SPA (Environment and Land Appeal E064 of 2024) [2025] KEELC 6201 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Notice of Motion dated 21st May 2025 in the Appellant's appeal from Nakuru BPRT No. E176 of 2023. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/6201/eng@2025-09-24
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.