Plaintiff v Defendant (Unlawful Eviction from Business Premises)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan landlord who forcibly evicted a shop tenant without a court order was ordered to pay over Shs. 350,000 in damages and costs.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Lawfulness of the eviction under Cap 301
The eviction was unlawful; notice under Cap 301 empowers the landlord only to seek a court order, not self-help eviction
The parties treated the tenancy as governed by Cap 301, but the notice was not in the prescribed form. Even with notice, the landlord could not forcibly evict without a court order. The defendant admitted police were not requested to assist, and its own supervising witness corroborated the removal of goods without any inventory.
Special damages for loss of goods
Awarded at Shs. 103,792/= as pleaded and supported by exhibits
The defence witness who supervised the eviction removed the goods, took no inventory, and goods were left unguarded outside; the court therefore accepted the plaintiff's valuation of the lost goods as proved.
Loss of profits
Claim failed for failure of proof of net daily profits
Gross daily sales included purchase prices and expenses; exhibits 7(a) and 7(b) did not disclose daily expenses, so average net earnings per day were not proved, though the court accepted the premises were unusable for 97 days (111 less 14 Sundays).
General damages for unlawful eviction
Awarded Shs. 250,000/= for the considerable damage suffered through the unlawful eviction and loss of goodwill
The court found adequate evidence that the plaintiff suffered considerable damage from the unlawful eviction, and entered general damages of Shs. 250,000/= in addition to the declaration and special damages.
Legal principles established
#- A landlord governed by Cap 301 must obtain a court order to evict a tenant and cannot take the law into his own hands even after serving notice
- Where a party who removes a tenant's goods takes no inventory, the court is entitled to believe the evicted tenant's claim as to the goods lost
Court orders
#- 1.Declaration that the purported termination of tenancy and subsequent eviction were unlawful
- 2.Judgment against the defendant for special damages of Shs. 103,792/= for loss of goods
- 3.General damages of Shs. 250,000/= for the unlawful eviction
- 4.Total of Shs. 353,792/= plus costs and interest at court rates
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Original civil jurisdiction of the High Court; tenancy governed by the Landlord & Tenant (Shops Hotels & Catering Establishments) Act Cap 301 Laws of Kenya
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Plaintiff v Defendant (Unlawful Eviction from Business Premises)", Case Analysis (2006). . Source:
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.