Rehemtulla & another v City Park Properities Investments Limited & 2 others (Environment and Land Case E113 of 2024) [2026] KEELC 4989 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court dismissed homeowners' bid to force a property transfer because they hadn't paid service charge, and ordered them to pay over Kshs 3.1 million in arrears.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the Defendants should be compelled to execute transfer documents for Maisonette No. 7
No. The Plaintiffs failed to prove payment of outstanding service charge, which Clause 7.2 of the Estate Rules makes a condition precedent to any transfer, and being in breach they lacked clean hands for equitable relief.
The 1st Plaintiff is the registered owner and shareholder obligated to pay service charge. The Defendants produced invoices showing arrears which the Plaintiffs did not rebut; PW1 confirmed he still enjoyed services and had paid last in August 2020. Since the clearance certificate under Rule 7.2 had not been obtained, the Defendants' refusal to execute the transfer documents was justified. The Plaintiffs, in breach of contract, could not invoke equity. Relief for specific performance of transfer was therefore unavailable.
Whether the Plaintiffs were entitled to the reliefs sought in the Plaint
No. The entire suit was dismissed: no declaration, injunction, management-related declaration, general or special damages were granted.
The 2nd Plaintiff's transfer was incomplete so he had no proprietary rights to protect and, not being a shareholder or owner, lacked locus standi. No evidence of directors' misconduct under the Companies Act was adduced. General damages are unavailable in contract, and special damages were neither pleaded nor proved. Accordingly all prayers failed.
Whether the Defendants' counter-claim for service charge arrears was merited
Yes. Judgment for Kshs. 3,149,717.86 as at 04/04/2024 plus penalty interest at 6% per quarter under Clause 16.2 until payment in full.
The Estate Rules, binding on the Plaintiffs, require payment of service charge monthly or quarterly under Clause 14.1. The Defendants adduced invoices and statements confirming arrears; PW1 admitted the last payment was in August 2020. The limitation objection was not upheld, the Court finding the rolling charges unchallenged. The contractual penalty interest of 6% per quarter was granted as provided in Clause 16.2.
Legal principles established
#- A party seeking an equitable order (compulsion of transfer documents) must come to equity with clean hands and do equity; breach of contractual payment obligations bars such relief.
- A court cannot rewrite a contract or relieve a party from a bad bargain absent fraud, coercion or undue influence.
- A sectional corporation may recover service charge arrears from an owner by action in debt, with contractual penalty interest.
- General damages are not recoverable in breach of contract; special damages must be specifically pleaded and strictly proved.
- Costs follow the event unless there are good reasons to do otherwise.
Court orders
#- 1.The Plaintiffs case is dismissed in its entirety
- 2.The Defendants' Counter-claim is allowed, and the Plaintiffs are ordered to pay Kshs. 3,149,717.86 as at 04/04/2024, together with further penalty interest at the rate of 6% per quarter until payment in full
- 3.The costs of the suit, the counter-claim and the application are awarded to the Defendants against the Plaintiffs
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Original jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court over the suit land (LR Number 209/7573) - no specific constitutional/statutory provision cited in the judgment
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Rehemtulla & another v City Park Properities Investments Limited & 2 others (Environment and Land Case E113 of 2024) [2026] KEELC 4989 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). ELC.E113.2024-NBI. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/4989/eng@2026-07-30
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.