Category: Buyer Guides

Real estate—especially in today’s market—isn’t just about knowing how to sell land or houses. It’s about how you show up in front of clients. Your personality, your strategy, and your way of building trust define your results far more than your listings ever will.

This is where the “Hunter-Farmer” model comes in—a classic framework used in sales to describe different types of salespeople.

But today, we’re going a step further.

Let’s explore the three personas of real estate agents: Hunter, Farmer and Gatherer.

1. The Hunter Agent

The Hunter is hungry. Always chasing the next lead. Cold calling, posting every day, running around Nairobi or Mombasa showing plots or apartments, and always pitching.

They live by one rule: “It’s a numbers game.” More calls, more clients, more viewings.

🔺 Trap to avoid: Burnout. When deals are slow, the Hunter can become desperate, pushing too hard or chasing bad leads.

Real-life example: You might recognize the Hunter in that agent who posts 20 listings a week, calls every number they get, and rarely follows up—because they’re already on to the next.

2. The Farmer Agent

The Farmer focuses on nurturing existing relationships. They maintain their “farm”—whether that’s a neighborhood, apartment complex, or network of past clients.

They thrive on referrals, repeat business, and slow but steady growth.

🔺 Trap to avoid: Over-dependence on one market or one set of clients. If your “farm” dries up (maybe due to economic shifts), you may be left with no pipeline.

Real-life example: You know the agent who manages a few buildings and gets steady commissions from tenant renewals or repeat landlords.

3. The Gatherer Agent

The Gatherer is a connector. They don’t just wait for opportunities—they go looking for them in smart ways. They attend events, network with developers, and are always gathering market intelligence.

They build strong relationships and are seen as “the person who knows things.”

🔺 Trap to avoid: Staying too comfortable in your circle. You must still close deals.

Real-life example: The Gatherer is that agent who knows five landlords in every area and can connect you with a plot in Kisumu and an Airbnb in Diani.

Have you seen yourself in any of the above? If not, let me know in the comments.

For me, I am currently a gatherer and trying to become something else.

A guide.

I want to educate and empower my clients. I want to help buyers and sellers navigate the market—not push them through it.

Here is how I plan to do that:

• Support Agents – I want to support other real estate agents to do what they already do. Grow. Sell.
• Sales intelligence – understanding what buyers and sellers need, and spotting opportunity.
• Social influence – using personal branding, content, and trust-building to attract clients instead of chasing them.

Here is why I think if you join me, you will win.

Real estate clients today are overwhelmed. With listings everywhere, Facebook ads popping up constantly, and agents promising the moon, trust is at an all-time low.

So, who do clients want to deal with?

✅ Someone who educates, not pressures
✅ Someone who listens, not just sells
✅ Someone who guides, not chases

The Guide is the trusted advisor—not just an agent. And that’s what clients in Kenya’s evolving property market are craving.

Want to attend and sit with me in a podcast? DM me.

Here is one podcast I did.

How to Become a Guide in Real Estate

1. Build your social influence.
Start posting helpful content. Teach people what they don’t know. Share your story. Answer questions. Show that you understand the market and the people in it.

If you’re in a room full of agents sharing the same listings, you won’t stand out—unless you’re the one sharing value.

2. Use sales intelligence tools.
Keep learning. Use property data, market reports, even feedback from past clients to sharpen your insight. Be the agent who knows why land is rising in Kitengela or why some apartments stay vacant in Kilimani.

So now ask yourself: Are you ready to become a Guide?

Several years ago, lawyers and property experts started raising concerns about Kenya’s outdated law governing commercial leases — the Landlord and Tenant (Shops, Hotels and Catering Establishments) Act. Although this law was meant to protect tenants, smart lease drafting and rigid interpretations by landlords often made it very difficult for tenants to exit leases, even in genuine cases of hardship.

A recent Supreme Court decision in Kwanza Estates Limited v Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology (JKUAT), delivered in December 2024, now provides clarity — and some important lessons — for both landlords and tenants.

What Happened?

In 2016, Kwanza Estates (the landlord) and JKUAT (the tenant) entered into a six-year lease. The rent started at Kshs. 45.5 million per year and would increase over time. The lease was not registered and had no break clause (meaning there was no easy way to end it early).

In 2021, after COVID-19 hit hard and new government policies reduced JKUAT’s income, the university decided that running its Nakuru campus was no longer financially sustainable. JKUAT gave the landlord a three-month notice and tried to vacate the premises.

But Kwanza Estates refused to accept the termination. They blocked JKUAT’s attempts to move out, issued fresh rent invoices, and even sent auctioneers after the university to recover unpaid rent — arguing that the lease was still in force until April 2022.

Court of Appeal clarifies on VAT on sale of commercial buildings

What the Courts Said

• The Environment and Land Court (ELC) sided with the landlord, saying the lease had no break clause and JKUAT must pay rent until the lease expired.
• The Court of Appeal overturned that, finding that COVID-19 and other unforeseen changes had frustrated the lease, and the phrase “sooner determination” in the lease allowed early exit. They ordered JKUAT to pay Kshs. 40 million to fix any damages to the premises but freed them from paying future rent.
• The Supreme Court, however, disagreed with the Court of Appeal and mostly agreed with the original trial court — but with important clarifications:
  • Force majeure (unforeseen major events like pandemics) can only apply if it’s written in the contract — and it wasn’t in this lease.
  • Frustration (when unexpected events make it impossible to perform a contract) applies only in very rare cases — and COVID-19 restrictions had already been lifted when JKUAT tried to exit.
  • The lease had no valid early termination clause.
  • JKUAT’s attempt to leave early was a breach of contract.

The Supreme Court ruled that landlords cannot force tenants to stay on a property they want to vacate, but they can claim damages for the early breach. In this case, damages — not future rent — were the correct remedy.

Why This Decision Matters

The Supreme Court’s ruling clears up several big questions for anyone entering a lease:

• Fixed-term leases without termination clauses are risky for tenants. Exiting early can expose tenants to heavy damages claims.
• Force majeure needs to be clearly stated in the contract. Without it, tenants cannot easily argue that events like a pandemic justify ending a lease.
• Landlords must try to mitigate their losses. If a tenant leaves early, landlords should look for a new tenant rather than simply claiming full rent for the remainder of the term.

KRA Introduces New System to file and pay taxes

Practical Lessons

For Landlords:

• Always draft leases carefully — including provisions for early termination and penalties.
• If a tenant leaves early, focus on finding a replacement quickly. Courts expect landlords to minimize losses, not sit back and demand full rent.
• Understand that damages, not continued rent, are the main legal remedy if a tenant breaches a lease.

For Tenants:

• Never assume you can walk away from a lease, even in tough times, unless the lease allows it or you can prove true frustration.
• If you want protection against events like pandemics or economic crises, insist on a strong force majeure clause when negotiating your lease.
• Know that you bear the burden of proving frustration — and courts apply it very strictly.

High Court Ruling is a win for Off-Plan Property Buyers

Final Thought

The Supreme Court’s decision in Kwanza Estates v JKUAT is a wake-up call: both landlords and tenants must be deliberate and cautious when entering lease agreements. Old tricks like drafting long leases without exit options may no longer guarantee landlords rent security. On the other hand, tenants must understand that hardship alone doesn’t automatically release them from their lease obligations.

Clear contracts, clear expectations, and clear remedies — that’s the way forward.

The Supreme Court has recently delivered a landmark ruling that promises major relief for many individuals with pending applications for lease extensions on government land.

At the center of the case was a land dispute in Ngara, Nairobi. A proprietor who had held a leasehold interest since 1968 — set to expire in 2001 — had applied for a lease extension three months before expiry. However, the government offered no response. Despite the silence, the proprietor remained in possession of the land, continuing to pay land rent and rates diligently.

Yet in 2009, the same property was allocated to another party. A new lease was issued, and the land was later sold. In 2014, the new buyer and the seller forcibly evicted the original proprietor, eventually using the property to secure financing for a high-rise building.

The evicted owner challenged the eviction in court, and after years of litigation, the matter reached the Supreme Court.

The detailed judgment is found in the link below.

Court of Appeal clarifies on VAT on sale of commercial buildings

What the Supreme Court Decided

The Court ruled that the 2009 allocation was unprocedural and illegal, making any title issued from it invalid.

“More often than not, public leases contain an option for renewal. However, such renewal must be activated by an application by the lessee to the government agency having authority to renew the lease. It follows therefore that where the lessee makes an application for renewal of his/her lease, his/her application would be considered either way and that, the applicant would be furnished with reasons should the application be declined,” states Supreme court Judges led by Justice Mohammed Ibrahim.

This decision clarified that the doctrine of an innocent purchaser for value — which often protects buyers who purchase land without knowledge of defects — could not apply in this case. A title acquired through irregular or illegal allocation cannot be legitimized, even by an innocent purchaser.

The doctrine of bona fide purchaser does not shield someone from the consequences of an invalid root of title.

KRA Introduces New System to file and pay taxes

The Court emphasized that the original proprietor, who had continued to occupy the land and had duly applied for an extension, had a legitimate expectation to have their application processed fairly. If the extension was to be denied, the authorities owed them clear reasons — not silence and subsequent dispossession.

The Supreme Court has unequivocally affirmed that upon the expiry of a lease, if it is not formally renewed, the leasehold interest is extinguished in its entirety. The land in question automatically reverts to the Government, transforming from a private leasehold back into Public Land.

The court’s position is clear: continued occupation or payment of land rent/ rates does not override the fundamental principle that a lease, once expired and unrenewed, ceases to have any legal effect.

As a result, the Court ordered:

• The cancellation of the current lease.
• The restoration of the evicted proprietor’s name to the land register.
• The demolition of the high-rise building constructed on the disputed land.

High Court Ruling is a win for Off-Plan Property Buyers

Why This Ruling Matters

This judgment strikes a powerful blow against brokers, corrupt officials, and political players who manipulate lease processes for personal gain.

It reinforces the right of leaseholders to apply for lease extensions without fear that their applications will be intentionally delayed, misplaced, or ignored — leading to unlawful reallocation.

In broader terms, the ruling adds to a growing body of progressive jurisprudence protecting leasehold interests, inspired by Kenya’s Constitution and reformed land laws. Over time, these legal developments are helping rebuild public trust in land administration.

A Wake-Up Call for Land Institutions

The Counties, the Ministry of Lands, and the National Land Commission must now take this emerging legal trend seriously.

It is critical for these institutions to retrain their officers to respect proper procedures, uphold transparency, and ensure fair treatment of leaseholders. Failure to adapt will expose them — and the public — to costly legal battles and increased distrust.

Bottom Line:
This Supreme Court ruling is more than just a win for one person. It’s a major step forward for all Kenyans who hold leasehold interests — affirming that justice and fairness must prevail, even in a system historically fraught with irregularities.

As a property owner, the most prudent approach is to apply for a lease extension at least five years before expiry. This rule of thumb exists for good reasons. In Kenya, there is a legal distinction between a lease extension and a lease renewal.

An extension, if applied for before the lease expires, preserves the leaseholder’s legal interest and ensures continuity of title. Renewal, on the other hand, occurs after expiry, by which time the land has already escheated to the Government, the lessee’s rights have lapsed, and any new grant is subject to reallocation risks and fresh terms.

When you factor in persistent delays at the land registry and the complications that can arise when life happens (such as the death of a co-tenant activating a procedural burden in the form of succession proceedings before any land dealings can occur), it becomes clear that waiting too long transforms a manageable administrative process into a precarious legal one.

The Kenya Revenue Authority (KRA) has launched the Electronic Rental Income Tax System (eRITS) as part of its commitment to improving tax compliance in the real estate sector. Built on KRA’s Enterprise Integration Platform, Gava Connect, this system aims to simplify the tax process for landlords, property owners, and real estate agents.

Dr. Chris Kiptoo, the National Treasury Principal Secretary, highlighted that eRITS is a significant milestone in streamlining tax compliance. By enhancing efficiency and equity in the tax system, this initiative will contribute directly to national development, benefiting all Kenyans. Kiptoo emphasized that the taxes collected through this system would support essential sectors like healthcare, education, and infrastructure.

Through eRITS, landlords can now register their properties and file taxes more easily. The system reduces the administrative burden, ensuring a smoother process for everyone involved. By making it easier to comply, the KRA hopes to increase voluntary compliance, ensuring that taxes are paid promptly and accurately.

Land Owners Guide to Land Rates and Land Rent Payment in Kenya

Humphrey Wattanga, KRA’s Commissioner-General, shared that eRITS would integrate seamlessly with KRA’s broader tax ecosystem, enabling property owners to compute, file, and pay taxes efficiently through both the Gava Connect API and the eCitizen platform. The system is designed to foster a more predictable and fair tax environment, ultimately benefiting both the government and taxpayers.

Landlords earning between Ksh 288,000 and Ksh 15 million annually are required to pay tax at the rate of 7.5% on their rental income, a reduction from the previous 10% tax rate. This tax rate change in January 2024 aims to ease the burden on taxpayers and drive further compliance.

Ultimate Guide to Monthly Residential Taxation of Rental income in Kenya

In the 2023/2024 financial year, tax revenues from landlords reached Ksh 14.4 billion, reflecting a 5.2% increase compared to the previous year. This indicates that the government’s efforts to streamline tax compliance are beginning to yield results, though the growth rate has slowed compared to the previous fiscal year.

Best Guide to Real Estate Taxation in Kenya

A recent ruling by the Court of Appeal has cleared up a long-standing question in Kenya’s real estate world: Should VAT apply to the sale of commercial buildings?

Spoiler: Yes, it should. Even if the land itself is VAT-exempt.

Let’s break it down.

Section 5 and Paragraph 8 of Part II of the First Schedule of the VAT Act (VAT Act) exempts the sale, rental, hiring or leasing of land and residential premises from VAT (save for hotels and holiday accommodations).

So, What Happened?

In the case of Kenya Revenue Authority v Ndegwa [2025], the Court of Appeal made a big decision that changes how we look at VAT in commercial property deals.

Here’s the story:
David Mwangi Ndegwa bought a piece of land from Standard Chartered Bank. That land came with commercial buildings on it. The total value? About KES 70 million.

KRA stepped in and said, “Hold up — you owe KES 11.2 million in VAT (16% of the total value).”
Ndegwa disagreed and paid under protest, then went to court asking for a refund.

What Did the Lower Courts Say?

At first, the High Court sided with Ndegwa. They looked at the VAT Act and interpreted “land” to include everything on, above, and below the surface. So in their view, the entire transaction — land and buildings — was VAT exempt.

But there was a twist.

In a separate case (National Bank of Kenya v Commissioner of Domestic Taxes), the High Court said Parliament clearly meant to exempt residential buildings only, not commercial ones. So, VAT could apply to commercial buildings, even if they were on VAT-exempt land.

Confused yet? You’re not alone — this contradiction is what landed the case at the Court of Appeal.

Top Factors to Consider before Investing in Commercial Real Estate in Kenya

What Did the Court of Appeal Decide?

The Court of Appeal said the definition of “land” depends on the context — especially when it comes to taxes.

Their conclusion?
✅ Land is exempt from VAT.
❌ Commercial buildings are not.

So, even if you’re buying land with commercial buildings on it, VAT still applies to the buildings. That’s true even though the land itself is exempt.

The court also said there’s no ambiguity in the law. Paragraph 8 of the VAT Act is clear — residential premises are exempt, not commercial ones.

What Didn’t the Court Say?

While the ruling was clear, there are still some grey areas.

• It didn’t say if VAT should apply to just the value of the buildings, or to the combined value of land and buildings.
• It didn’t clarify how to handle VAT for mixed-use properties (those with both residential and commercial space).

So, there’s still more to be worked out in future cases.

Best Guide to Real Estate Taxation in Kenya

What This Means for You

If you’re buying or leasing commercial property, expect to pay VAT on the value of the buildings.

And if you’ve bought commercial property in the last few years and didn’t pay VAT? KRA might come knocking. The ruling suggests they could go back five years and issue new tax assessments.

Final Thoughts

This decision brings some much-needed clarity to the sector — and reminds all of us how important it is to understand tax rules when dealing with property.

But for buyers, this also means higher costs when investing in or leasing commercial buildings.

The story isn’t quite over yet — Ndegwa still has the option to appeal to the Supreme Court.