KMK – Ukuria Investment v Njai Kamau & John Muema Mutuku [2020] eKLR Case Summary

Court
Business Premises Rent Tribunal at Nairobi
Category
Civil
Judge(s)
Mbichi Mboroki (Chairman)
Judgment Date
August 02, 2019
Country
Kenya
Document Type
PDF
Number of Pages
2
Explore the case summary of KMK – Ukuria Investment v Njai Kamau & John Muema Mutuku [2020] eKLR, highlighting key legal findings and implications in Kenyan law.

Case Brief: KMK – Ukuria Investment v Njai Kamau & John Muema Mutuku [2020] eKLR

1. Case Information:
- Name of the Case: KMK – Ukuria Investment v. Njai Kamau & John Muema Mutuku
- Case Number: Tribunal Case No. 201, 202 & 218 & 257 of 2012 (Nairobi)
- Court: Business Premises Rent Tribunal
- Date Delivered: 2nd August 2019
- Category of Law: Civil
- Judge(s): Mbichi Mboroki (Chairman)
- Country: Republic of Kenya

2. Questions Presented:
The central legal issue presented to the court is the determination of the Tenant's bill of costs, which amounts to Kshs 308,675, following proceedings related to the termination of tenancy.

3. Facts of the Case:
The parties involved in this case are the Landlord, KMK – Ukuria Investment, and the Tenants, Njai Kamau and John Muema Mutuku. The dispute arose from the termination of tenancy, with the annual rent agreed upon at Kshs 180,000. The Tenant submitted a bill of costs dated 6th May 2017, claiming a total of Kshs 308,675. The Landlord submitted written submissions on 17th January 2019, and the Tenant responded on 11th February 2019.

4. Procedural History:
The case progressed through the Business Premises Rent Tribunal, where the Tenant's bill of costs was assessed. The Tribunal reviewed the submissions from both parties and the available records, despite the absence of the original file. The Tribunal took into account the Advocate's Remuneration Order, specifically schedule 8, to evaluate the costs claimed by the Tenant.

5. Analysis:
- Rules: The Tribunal relied on the Advocate's Remuneration Order, specifically schedule 8, which outlines the fees and costs that can be claimed by an advocate in relation to legal proceedings.
- Case Law: The ruling does not explicitly mention specific case law, but the principles of taxation of costs in civil proceedings are guided by established legal precedents and the provisions of the Advocate's Remuneration Order.
- Application: The Tribunal assessed the items listed in the Tenant's bill of costs and determined that the appropriate amount payable to the Tenant was Kshs 158,665, significantly lower than the amount claimed. The Tribunal's reasoning involved a detailed item-by-item review of the costs in relation to the prescribed fees under the Advocate's Remuneration Order.

6. Conclusion:
The Tribunal ruled that the Tenant's bill of costs was taxed at Kshs 158,665, which was to be paid within six months. In default of payment, the Tenant was granted the right to execute under section 14(1) of Cap 301. This decision underscores the importance of adhering to prescribed legal fee structures in tenancy disputes.

7. Dissent:
There were no dissenting opinions noted in the ruling. The decision was delivered in the presence of a representative for the Landlord, while the advocate for the Tenant was absent.

8. Summary:
The ruling in KMK – Ukuria Investment v. Njai Kamau & John Muema Mutuku determined that the Tenant's bill of costs would be taxed at Kshs 158,665, reflecting a significant reduction from the original claim. This case highlights the Tribunal's role in assessing and regulating legal costs in tenancy disputes, ensuring compliance with established remuneration guidelines. The outcome emphasizes the necessity for parties to substantiate their claims for costs within the framework of legal provisions.

Document Summary

Below is the summary preview of this document.

  • KMK-–-Ukuria-Investment-v-Njai-Kamau--John-Muema-Mutuku-[2020]-eKLR-Case-Summary_2285_0.jpg

This is the end of the summary preview.

Related Documents

View all summaries