[2022] KEHC 11085 (KLR)
The court held that the jurisdiction of the Small Claims Court is governed by section 11 of the Small Claims Act, which provides for the designation of local limits by the Chief Justice. The applicant, who challenged the jurisdiction of the Machakos Small Claims Court, bore the burden of proving that the court...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2022] KEHC 11085 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: David Okemwa Chacha; Respondent: Benard Nzioki Mwinzi
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Machakos
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Civil Application 73 of 2022
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Transfer Suit
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Judges
- GV Odunga
- Legal Topics
- Jurisdiction of Small Claims Court, Transfer of Suits, Forum Shopping
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
David Okemwa Chacha
Applicant
Benard Nzioki Mwinzi
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Transfer Suit
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Machakos Small Claims Court has jurisdiction to hear and determine the dispute between the parties.
- 2 Whether the suit should be transferred from Machakos Small Claims Court to Nairobi Small Claims Court.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that the jurisdiction of the Small Claims Court is governed by section 11 of the Small Claims Act, which provides for the designation of local limits by the Chief Justice. The applicant, who challenged the jurisdiction of the Machakos Small Claims Court, bore the burden of proving that the court lacked jurisdiction as per the Chief Justice's designation. Since the applicant failed to provide any evidence that Machakos Small Claims Court was not empowered to hear the dispute, the application to transfer the suit to Nairobi Small Claims Court could not succeed. The court further clarified that section 15 of the Civil Procedure Act, which deals with the place of suing, does...
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The application to transfer Machakos Small Claims Civil Case No. E167 of 2022 to Nairobi Small Claims Court is dismissed.
- Costs of the application shall be in the suit pending before the Small Claims Court.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
25 paragraphs
Chacha v Mwinzi (Miscellaneous Civil Application 73 of 2022) [2022] KEHC 11085 (KLR) (28 July 2022) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2022] KEHC 11085 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Machakos
Miscellaneous Civil Application 73 of 2022
GV Odunga, J
July 28, 2022
Between
David Okemwa Chacha
Applicant
and
Benard Nzioki Mwinzi
Respondent
Ruling
1. By a Notice of Motion dated 25th May, 2022, the applicant herein seeks an order that Machakos Small Claims Civil Case No. E167 of 2022 be transferred to Nairobi Small Claims Court for hearing and determination.
2. The grounds upon which the application is based are that the Respondent herein together with his wife defrauded the Applicant of a certain sums of money for sale of some shares and a parcel of land at Katani, Mavoko Municipality. According to the applicant all the said transactions were done in Nairobi where the Respondent’s wife had an office.
3. Upon learning that he had been defrauded, the applicant, averred, he reported the matter to Central Police Station, Nairobi and the Respondent’s wife was arrested and charged with the offence of obtaining (sic) in criminal case No. 754 of 2017. However, the Respondent approached the applicant and proposed to settle the matter on condition that the applicant withdraws the criminal case. It was deposed that the Respondent instituted the said Small Claims suit reclaiming Kshs 170,000. 00 which the Respondent had paid as part payment of the sum due to the Applicant to which the Applicant objected on the ground of lack of jurisdiction and forum shopping.
4. In response to the application the Respondent filed grounds of opposition in which it was contended that the agreement the subject matter of the said suit was entered into and attested at Machakos in the offices of the Respondent’s Counsel. It was further contended that the cause of action arose in Machakos hence the suit could be properly filed in Machakos despite the fact that the Respondent resides in Nairobi. Further, it is contended in the said grounds that both the claimant and the respondent reside in Syokimau, Machakos County.
Determination 5. I have considered the application, the response as well as the submissions. Section 11 of theSmall Claims Act, No. 2 of 2016 which provides for Local limits of the Court’s jurisdiction, states as hereunder:1)The Chief Justice shall determine and publish a notice in the Gazette designating the local limits of the jurisdiction of Small Claims Court.(2)When determining the local limits of the jurisdiction of the Court, the Chief Justice shall ensure that such Courts are accessible in every sub-county and progressively in other decentralized units of judicial service delivery.
6. The parties herein seem to have been under the erroneous impression that the jurisdiction of the Small Claims Court is to be guided by section 15 of the Civil Procedure Act. That however is not the case since section 3 of the Civil Procedure Act provides as hereunder:In the absence of any specific provision to the contrary, nothing in this Act shall limit or otherwise affect any special jurisdiction or power conferred, or any special form or procedure prescribed, by or under any other law for the time being in force.
7. It follows that where there is a special jurisdiction or power conferred by any other law, the Civil Procedure Act does not apply. In this case the jurisdiction of the Small Claims Court is prescribed under section 11 of the Small Claims Act. It follows that section 15 of the Civil Procedure Act is inapplicable.
8. In this case, since it is the Applicant who is contending that the Machakos Small Claims Court has no jurisdiction to hear and determine the matter, the burden was upon him to place before this Court material showing that according to the designation by the Chief Justice, Machakos Small Claims Court has no power to hear and determine the dispute in question. No such evidence has been placed before me.
9. Accordingly, this application fails and is dismissed. The costs of this application will be in the suit pending before the Small Claims Court.
10. It is so ordered.
READ, SIGNED AND DELIVERED IN OPEN COURT AT MACHAKOS THIS 28TH DAY OF JULY, 2022. G V ODUNGAJUDGEDelivered in the presence of:Mr Moindi for the ApplicantCA Susan