Peter Kaberia Kaumbuthu v Teresia N. Gathuita & 2 others [2020] eKLR Case Summary

Court
Business Premises Rent Tribunal at Nairobi
Category
Civil
Judge(s)
Mbichi Mboroki, Chairman
Judgment Date
June 18, 2019
Country
Kenya
Document Type
PDF
Number of Pages
2
Discover the case summary of Peter Kaberia Kaumbuthu v Teresia N. Gathuita & 2 others [2020] eKLR. Explore key legal findings and implications in this significant ruling.

Case Brief: Peter Kaberia Kaumbuthu v Teresia N. Gathuita & 2 others [2020] eKLR

1. Case Information:
- Name of the Case: Peter Kaberia Kaumbuthu v. Teresia N. Gathuita, Judy W. Gathuita, Jane W. Gathuita
- Case Number: Tribunal Case No. 356 of 2017
- Court: Business Premises Rent Tribunal, Nairobi
- Date Delivered: 18th June 2019
- Category of Law: Civil
- Judge(s): Mbichi Mboroki, Chairman
- Country: Kenya

2. Questions Presented:
The central legal issues before the tribunal were whether it had the authority to punish for contempt of court and whether the application filed by the tenant could be entertained given the recent declaration of unconstitutionality of the Contempt of Court Act.

3. Facts of the Case:
The parties involved in the case are Peter Kaberia Kaumbuthu, the tenant, and Teresia N. Gathuita, Judy W. Gathuita, and Jane W. Gathuita, the landlords. On 19th October 2017, the tenant filed an application against the landlords seeking to have them committed to civil jail for contempt of court, along with a request for costs. The landlords contested the application by filing a preliminary objection, asserting that the tribunal lacked the power to punish for contempt.

4. Procedural History:
The tribunal received the tenant's application on 18th October 2017. In response, the landlords filed a preliminary objection on 19th March 2018, claiming the tribunal's lack of jurisdiction. Both parties submitted written arguments on 23rd April 2018. The tribunal reviewed the submissions and the relevant legal framework, leading to the eventual ruling on 18th June 2019.

5. Analysis:
- Rules: The tribunal considered the Contempt of Court Act No. 46/2016, which had previously granted it the authority to punish for contempt. However, this Act was declared unconstitutional by the High Court, which significantly impacted the tribunal's jurisdiction.
- Case Law: The tribunal referenced the ruling by Justice Chache Muite, which declared the Contempt of Court Act unconstitutional, thereby setting a precedent that limited the tribunal's powers regarding contempt applications.
- Application: The tribunal concluded that, as a creature of Cap 301, it did not possess the authority to entertain the tenant's application due to the unconstitutionality of the relevant statute. Consequently, the tribunal upheld the landlords' preliminary objection and dismissed the tenant's application for lack of jurisdiction.

6. Conclusion:
The tribunal ruled in favor of the landlords, upholding the preliminary objection and dismissing the tenant's application for contempt due to a lack of jurisdiction. This ruling underscores the limitations of the tribunal's authority following the High Court's declaration regarding the Contempt of Court Act.

7. Dissent:
There were no dissenting opinions noted in this case, as the ruling was unanimous under the tribunal's chairman.

8. Summary:
The outcome of Peter Kaberia Kaumbuthu v. Teresia N. Gathuita et al. illustrated the limitations of the Business Premises Rent Tribunal concerning contempt applications following the unconstitutionality of the Contempt of Court Act. The decision reinforces the principle of jurisdictional authority and highlights the impact of higher court rulings on lower tribunals.

Document Summary

Below is the summary preview of this document.

  • Peter-Kaberia-Kaumbuthu-v-Teresia-N-Gathuita--2-others-[2020]-eKLR-Case-Summary_2191_0.jpg

This is the end of the summary preview.

Related Documents

View all summaries