Africasa Real Estate Limited v Scorpio Enterprises Limited
The bottom line
#A Kenyan landlord won Kshs 21.9 million against a tenant who made unauthorised alterations and never paid utilities, largely because the tenant offered no evidence in its defence.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Effect of failure by the defendant to adduce evidence
The plaintiff's evidence stood unchallenged and uncontroverted and was sufficient to prove the claim on a balance of probabilities
The defendant filed a defence but called no witness. Relying on established authority, the court held that unrebuted evidence leaves the court no option but to infer the facts as true; the defence remained mere statements of fact incapable of displacing the plaintiff's proof of liability.
Liability for utility and conservancy charges under the subleases
The subleases obliged the defendant to pay water, electricity, sanitary conservancy and telephone charges, and the defendant never paid them; the plaintiff's recovery of Kshs 1,604,893.40 was valid
The court examined clause 1(b) of the lease dated 24th November 2014 and a similar clause in the lease dated 31st December 2014, both requiring the defendant to bear these charges. With no contrary evidence, the court found the obligation established and unpaid.
Cost of restoring alterations made without consent
The Kshs 20,242,425.00 restoration cost was not controverted and was recoverable as damages for breach of the covenant against unauthorised alterations
The plaintiff pleaded structural alterations made without written consent and produced a valuer's assessment of restoration costs. The defendant neither cross-examined on this evidence nor disputed the valuation fee, so the claim was proved unchallenged on a balance of probabilities.
Legal principles established
#- Failure to rebut or challenge an opponent's evidence permits the court to act on that uncontroverted evidence
- A party that fails to call evidence leaves its pleadings as mere statements of fact, unsubstantiated
Court orders
#- 1.Judgment entered for the plaintiff against the defendant for the sum of Kenya Shillings 21,912,318.40
- 2.Costs of the suit awarded to the plaintiff
- 3.Interest on the decretal sum and costs at court rates
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Original civil jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court over lease/sublease disputes concerning land in Malindi
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Africasa Real Estate Limited v Scorpio Enterprises Limited", Case Analysis (2026). ELC Case Number 1 of 2020. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/5530/eng@2026-09-22
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.