Omondi t/a Dahan Ventures v Opi & another (Miscellaneous Application E363 of 2025) [2026] KEMC 598 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan garage that waited five years to sell an abandoned car was only paid six months of storage fees, proving custodians must act quickly.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Entitlement to storage charges for uncollected goods
The custodian is entitled to storage fees but only for a reasonable period of six months, i.e. Kshs. 90,000/=, because of failure to mitigate
The court found the goods were deposited by a person who is not a party to the application, since the 2nd Respondent only became registered owner on 07th July 2020, after the deposit date. Although this would have led to dismissal, the current registered owner did not oppose the sale. On quantum, the court adopted the mitigation principle in Power Solutions Limited, holding a diligent custodian should move court promptly, and awarded Kshs. 500 x 30 x 6 = Kshs. 90,000/=.
Good title on sale under section 8 of the Act where the depositor was not the owner
The custodian can only give good title to a purchaser under section 8 after obtaining the 2nd Respondent's consent, and must pay the 2nd Respondent Kshs. 25,000/= from the proceeds
Section 8(2) provides that a sale gives good title as against the depositor, but not as against the owner if the depositor did not own the goods. Since the unknown depositor no longer owns the goods, the custodian cannot pass good title without the consent of the current registered owner, who conditioned consent on recovery of the Kshs. 25,000/= purchase price balance owed by Eliab Sato.
Legal principles established
#- A custodian of uncollected goods has a duty to mitigate loss and cannot claim storage charges ad infinitum
- Six months is a reasonable period for a custodian to move the court for disposal of uncollected goods
- Under section 8(2) of the Disposal of Uncollected Goods Act, a sale does not give good title against the owner where the depositor did not own the goods
Court orders
#- 1.The motor vehicle registration number KCZ 823 B Toyota Axio left/stored in the Dahan Ventures' yard/garage on 23rd March 2020 is declared as uncollected goods
- 2.The Applicant is at liberty to sell the uncollected goods comprised in the Notice of Intention to Sell dated 25th October 2024 by way of public auction through a licensed auctioneer at the best reasonable price in the circumstances
- 3.The proceeds of the sale to be deposited with Benta Omondi t/a Dahari Ventures to defray the storage charges of Kshs. 90,000/=, the Kshs. 25,000/= due to the 2nd Respondent, as well as the costs of the sale
- 4.The sum of Kshs. 25,000/= due to the 2nd Respondent be recovered from the proceeds of the sale of the goods in priority to any other claims
- 5.Upon defraying the sums in (c) above, the Applicant shall release the balance of the proceeds of sale, if any, to the 2nd Respondent for onward transmission to Eliab Sato
- 6.Each party to bear their costs of this Application
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Order (sic) 3 & 3A of the Civil Procedure Act and sections 7 & 8 of the Disposal of Uncollected Goods Act
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Omondi t/a Dahan Ventures v Opi & another (Miscellaneous Application E363 of 2025) [2026] KEMC 598 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Notice of Motion dated 13th November 2025 (Bungoma). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kemc/2026/598/eng@2026-02-12
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.