https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/scc/2026/208
The claim was not incompetent for want of a verifying affidavit because the Small Claims Court regime does not require one. The undated claim was only a formal irregularity, curable without striking out the matter, especially since no prejudice was shown and the filing date was ascertainable from the record.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2026] SCC 208 (KLR)
- Parties
- Claimant: Valary Cherunya; Respondent: Max-Global Ltd; Respondent: Cornelius Kiplagat and 1 others
- Court
- Small Claims Court
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Commercial Case E651 of 2026
- Procedural Posture
- Small Claims Court Civil Claim / Ruling on Preliminary Objection/application to File Verifying Affidavit
- Outcome
- Respondent’s objection overruled; application to file a verifying affidavit declined; claimant directed to rectify and serve the statement of claim.
- Judges
- ["ME Aligula"]
- Legal Topics
- Competency of Statement of Claim, Verifying Affidavit Requirement, Undated Pleading, Procedural Formalities, Small Claims Court Procedure
- 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
Valary Cherunya
Claimant
Max-Global Ltd
Respondent
Cornelius Kiplagat and 1 others
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Small Claims Court Civil Claim / Ruling on Preliminary Objection/application to File Verifying Affidavit
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether failure to file a verifying affidavit renders a Small Claims Court claim incompetent or defective.
- 2 Whether failure to date the statement of claim renders the claim incompetent or a nullity.
- 3 Whether the court should allow filing of a verifying affidavit or direct rectification of the undated claim.
Ratio Decidendi
The claim was not incompetent for want of a verifying affidavit because the Small Claims Court regime does not require one. The undated claim was only a formal irregularity, curable without striking out the matter, especially since no prejudice was shown and the filing date was ascertainable from the record.
Court Disposition
Respondent’s objection overruled; application to file a verifying affidavit declined; claimant directed to rectify and serve the statement of claim.
Orders
- Application to file a verifying affidavit is unnecessary and declined.
- Claimant shall date the statement of claim.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
**REPUBLIC OF KENYA** **IN THE SMALL CLAIMS COURT OF KENYA AT UASIN GISHU COUNTY COURT NAME: ELDORET SMALL CLAIMS COURT** **CASE NUMBER: SCCCOMM/E651/2026 VALARY CHERUNYA VS MAX-GLOBAL LTD AND CORNELIUS KIPLAGAT AND 1 OTHERS** **RULING** 1. I have considered the oral submission by both Ms. Talam and Mr Kofuna. The issue for determination before this court is whether the Claimant’s failure to file a verifying affidavit and failure to date the statement of claim filed renders the claim incompetent and or defective. The Claimant has sought leave to file a verifying affidavit, which application has been opposed on the ground that the Statement of Claim is defective for want of such affidavit. 2. The procedure for instituting a claim in the Small Claims Court is specifically provided for under the Act and the Rules. Rule 3(1) of the Small Claims Court Rules, 2019, proceedings are commenced by completing and filing Form SCC-1 (Statement of Claim) and paying the prescribed fee. The Rule does not require a verifying affidavit to accompany the Statement of Claim. This is also consistent with section 24 of the Small Claims Courts Act, which specifies what a Statement of Claim must contain: the parties' details, nature of the claim, amount claimed, relief sought, and sufficient particulars to inform the respondent of the basis of the claim and how the amount was calculated. There is no requirement for a verifying affidavit. 3. A verifying affidavit is a requirement under the Civil Procedure Rules in ordinary civil proceedings in circumstances provided therein. The Small Claims Court, however, is a special statutory forum governed principally by the Small Claims Court Act and the Rules made thereunder. The ordinary Civil Procedure Rules cannot be imported to impose a requirement that is not prescribed by the Small Claims Court's own procedural framework. Consequently, the absence of a verifying affidavit does not render the Claimant's Statement of Claim defective or incompetent. There is therefore no basis upon which the claim can be struck out or dismissed on that ground. 4. On the issue of claim being undated Under the Small Claims Court Rules, 2019, the claim is commenced by filing the prescribed Statement of Claim. The Rules do not expressly state that failure to insert a date on the Statement of Claim automatically invalidates the claim.an undated Statement of Claim does not, by itself, render a claim before the Small Claims Court incompetent, particularly where the document was properly filed, signed, and the filing date can be ascertained from the court record. In any case, in the spirit of article 159(2)(d) the court may direct the claimant to rectify the defect by dating the claim rather than terminating the claim. The mere omission of a date, in circumstances where the claim was duly filed and the date of filing is ascertainable from the Court record, is, in my view, a formal irregularity which does not, without more, render the proceedings a nullity. No prejudice has been demonstrated to have been occasioned to the Respondent by the omission. 5. Further, Section 3 of the small claims court provides that the court shall adopt procedures as the court deems appropriate to ensure among others, fairness of the process and simplicity of procedures. In the upshot, the objection by the respondent's counsel is overruled. The application by the Claimant to file a verifying affidavit is unnecessary and is accordingly declined, the claimant is directed to date the statement of claim, upload on the CTS and serve the respondent within 2 days. Mention on 5th October, 2025 for compliance and to take a hearing date. Parties granted leave to appeal. Ruling dated and delivered at Eldoret this 14th day of August, 2026. M.E Aligula In the presence of: C/A Mr. Lepatoiye