Airworks Kenya Limited v Kenya Aerospace Limited [2020] eKLR Case Summary

Court
Business Premises Rent Tribunal at Nairobi
Category
Civil
Judge(s)
Mbichi Mboroki (Chairman)
Judgment Date
May 26, 2020
Country
Kenya
Document Type
PDF
Number of Pages
2
Explore the case summary of Airworks Kenya Limited v Kenya Aerospace Limited [2020] eKLR. Discover key legal insights and outcomes relevant to the aviation industry in Kenya.

Case Summary: Airworks Kenya Limited v Kenya Aerospace Limited [2020] eKLR

1. Case Information:
- Name of the Case: Airworks Kenya Limited v. Kenya Aerospace Limited
- Case Number: Tribunal Case No 84 of 2020 (Nairobi)
- Court: Business Premises Rent Tribunal
- Date Delivered: May 26, 2020
- Category of Law: Civil
- Judge(s): Mbichi Mboroki (Chairman)
- Country: Kenya

2. Questions Presented:
The central legal issue in this case is whether the Business Premises Rent Tribunal has jurisdiction to hear and determine the dispute between Airworks Kenya Limited (Tenant) and Kenya Aerospace Limited (Landlord), particularly in light of the existence of a lease agreement that specifies the terms of tenancy.

3. Facts of the Case:
The parties involved in this case are Airworks Kenya Limited, the Tenant/Applicant, and Kenya Aerospace Limited, the Landlord/Respondent. The Tenant filed a notice of motion on January 22, 2020, seeking an order to restrain the Landlord and its agents from interfering with the Tenant’s enjoyment of the premises. The dispute arose from a lease agreement dated March 12, 2018, which established a six-year term for the tenancy. The Landlord contended that the Tribunal lacked jurisdiction to hear the case due to the terms of the lease.

4. Procedural History:
The Tenant's initial application led to the issuance of interim restraining orders by the Tribunal on January 23, 2020. However, the Landlord filed a preliminary objection on January 7, 2020, arguing that the Tribunal lacked jurisdiction based on the lease agreement. Following this, the Landlord also filed a notice of motion seeking to set aside the Tribunal's orders. The Tenant responded with a replying affidavit on February 27, 2020, but the Tribunal ultimately found that the Tenant had not disclosed the lease agreement, which was crucial to determining jurisdiction.

5. Analysis:
- Rules: The Tribunal considered relevant statutes, particularly section 12(4) and section 13 of Cap 301, which govern the jurisdiction of the Tribunal in disputes related to leases. The definition of "controlled tenancy" under section 2(1)(b)(ii) of Cap 301 was also significant.

- Case Law: The Tribunal referenced the principles established in the Mukisa Biscuit Case (1969) EA, which outlines the criteria for a preliminary objection, particularly focusing on whether the Tribunal had jurisdiction based on the admitted facts.

- Application: The Tribunal found that the Tenant failed to disclose the existence of the lease agreement, which was a critical factor. The lease did not contain a termination clause that would classify it as a controlled tenancy. The Tribunal concluded that since the lease created a tenancy that was not controlled, it did not have jurisdiction to hear the dispute. The Tenant's application was struck out for lack of jurisdiction.

6. Conclusion:
The Tribunal ruled in favor of the Landlord, allowing the application to set aside the interim orders and striking out the Tenant's application for lack of jurisdiction. The Tenant was ordered to pay costs to the Landlord. This decision underscores the importance of lease agreements in determining jurisdiction in tenancy disputes.

7. Dissent:
There were no dissenting opinions noted in this case.

8. Summary:
The ruling in Airworks Kenya Limited v. Kenya Aerospace Limited affirmed the principle that the jurisdiction of the Business Premises Rent Tribunal is contingent upon the nature of the tenancy as defined by the lease agreement. The Tribunal's decision to strike out the Tenant's application for lack of jurisdiction highlights the necessity for parties to disclose all relevant agreements in disputes regarding tenancy. The case serves as a precedent for future disputes involving the interpretation of lease agreements and the jurisdiction of the Tribunal.

Document Summary

Below is the summary preview of this document.

  • Airworks-Kenya-Limited-v-Kenya-Aerospace-Limited-[2020]-eKLR-Case-Summary_2355_0.jpg

This is the end of the summary preview.

Related Documents

View all summaries