Small Claims Court orders Lorenzo Dry Cleaners to pay Sh114,616 over damaged suit

NAIROBI, Kenya, Sep 11 — The Milimani Small Claims Court has ordered Lorenzo Dry Cleaners Limited to pay Sh114,616 after finding that a three-piece suit was damaged while in the company’s custody. Breaking It Down The court also awarded the claimant interest at 12 per cent per annum from July 13, 2026, until payment in full, as well as Sh20,000 in costs with a 30-day stay of execution. The judgment delivered on September 8 followed a claim by E

09/11/26  •  4 Views

Business & Finance
Jukwaa avatar

NAIROBI, Kenya, Sep 11 — The Milimani Small Claims Court has ordered Lorenzo Dry Cleaners Limited to pay Sh114,616 after finding that a three-piece suit was damaged while in the company’s custody.

📻 Breaking It Down

The court also awarded the claimant interest at 12 per cent per annum from July 13, 2026, until payment in full, as well as Sh20,000 in costs with a 30-day stay of execution.

The judgment delivered on September 8 followed a claim by Emmanuel Mumia over damage to his striped navy suit.

Mumia had claimed £1,064.95, equivalent to Sh183,826.66, as the value of the suit, which he said was damaged while being dry-cleaned.

📌 What You Need to Know

According to the judgment, the suit was delivered to Lorenzo Dry Cleaners on March 16, 2026, and returned to Mumia’s residence on March 23. The company’s intake record listed only “ordinary dirt and lint” and did not record discoloration or other damage.

Mumia later reported that the jacket had developed three dark patches of discoloration and loose threads on the right sleeve.

The company apologized, collected the jacket for assessment and indicated that it was “trying to work on it” before eventually declining to compensate Mumia.

Lorenzo Dry Cleaners disputed liability, arguing that Mumia had not proved the discoloration existed when the suit left its custody. It also pointed to its terms and conditions requiring complaints to be made within 24 hours of delivery.

The court, however, found the company’s response to the complaint relevant in assessing the competing evidence.

“These circumstances, considered cumulatively, make it more probable than not that the damage occurred while the suit was in the Respondent’s custody,” the Small Claims Court ruled.

📰 Source: Capital FM Kenya

0 Comments
No comments found

Related Articles