Sign in
Kenya Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

Kenya Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
3 court collections
Last checked

Kenya decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Civil procedure [2026] SCC 240 (KLR)

Wambui v Shiranda

The claimant failed to prove a Kshs. 84,000 debt in the Small Claims Court, while the respondent proved part of his counterclaim for Kshs. 6,000.

  • Burden of proof
  • Proof of monetary claim
  • Special damages
  • Informality of evidence in small claims court
  • Counterclaim
  • Recovery of alleged debt
Read case analysis
Civil procedure [2026] KEHC 13362 (KLR)

Mick Dennis Gitonga v Nancy Odhungo

The High Court allowed an appeal from the Small Claims Court, faulting the trial court for shifting the burden of proof and accepting unproven expense claims.

  • Burden of proof
  • Evidentiary burden
  • Oral contract
  • Refund of deposit
  • Partial performance
  • Unjust enrichment
Read case analysis
Civil procedure [2026] KEHC 13370 (KLR)

Christine Wahome v Emmanuel Mwania & Clement Waituika

High Court allowed an appeal over WhatsApp service, holding service on a registered number was not enough where the number was not shown to be the defendant’s used number.

  • Service of summons by whatsapp
  • Regular versus irregular default judgment
  • Setting aside ex-parte judgment
  • Burden of proof on service
  • Triable issues
  • Overriding objective
Read case analysis
Civil procedure [2026] KEHC 13180 (KLR)

Kiplangat v Tuwei & another

Kiplangat v Tuwei & another (Civil Appeal E256 of 2025) [2026] KEHC 13180 (KLR) (31 August 2026) (Judgment)

The High Court set aside an ex parte small claims judgment, holding that the appellant had not been properly heard and ordering a retrial before a different adjudicator.

  • Setting aside ex parte/default judgment
  • Right to fair hearing
  • Regular versus irregular judgment
  • Service of process
  • Electronic evidence
  • Trial discretion
Read case analysis
Civil procedure [2026] SCC 226 (KLR)

Mbugua v Mugada

Mbugua v Mugada (Commercial Case E4756 of 2025) [2026] SCC 226 (KLR) (21 August 2026) (Ruling)

The applicant did not demonstrate any statutory ground for review. His complaints about ownership of the motor vehicle, the effect of registration, the alleged payment of Kshs.500,000, and the concepts of detinue and conversion all required re-evaluation of evidence and therefore could not amount to an error apparent on the face of the record. The proper remedy, if he believed the court erred in law or fact, was appeal, not review. Because the review failed, there was no basis for stay of execution or for setting aside and substituting the judgment.

  • Review of judgment
  • Stay of execution
  • Error apparent on the face of the record
  • Ownership of motor vehicle
  • Registration as prima facie evidence of ownership
  • Warranty/passsing of property in goods
Read case analysis
Civil procedure [2026] SCC 216 (KLR)

Mwangi v Lesma Travels Ltd

Mwangi v Lesma Travels Ltd (Commercial Case E6702 of 2026) [2026] SCC 216 (KLR) (14 August 2026) (Judgment)

The claimant discharged the burden of proof by producing the agreement, proof of payment, and a signed refund form acknowledging that services were not rendered and a refund was due. The respondent's unproven assertion of a partial refund could not defeat the documentary evidence. The court therefore found the full claim proved on a balance of probabilities and entered judgment for the claimant.

  • Burden and standard of proof
  • Uncontested claim
  • Refund of monies paid for services not rendered
  • Contractual breach
  • Interest and costs
  • Stay of execution
Read case analysis
Civil procedure [2026] SCC 224 (KLR)

Kingoro v Muthini

Kingoro v Muthini (Commercial Case E6765 of 2026) [2026] SCC 224 (KLR) (14 August 2026) (Judgment)

The claimant proved only Kshs. 400,000 of the alleged loan on a balance of probabilities because the correspondence supported that principal sum, but the additional Kshs. 100,000 claimed as interest was found unconscionable and unenforceable due to its rapid and disproportionate escalation of a friendly loan.

  • Burden and standard of proof
  • Undefended claim
  • Proof of loan transaction
  • Unconscionable interest
  • Court rates
  • Costs
Read case analysis
Civil procedure [2026] SCC 209 (KLR)

Oyuchi v Magut

Oyuchi v Magut (Commercial Case E731 of 2026) [2026] SCC 209 (KLR) (14 August 2026) (Judgment)

The Court found that the evidence was insufficient to establish which party breached the lease agreements, so the double-refund clause and the full claim of Kshs.400,000 could not be enforced. However, the Respondent expressly admitted that Kshs.150,000 remained outstanding and payable, and that admitted sum was therefore recoverable by the Claimant. The claim for expected profits failed because it was unsupported by any proof.

  • Lease agreement breach
  • Refund of consideration
  • Double-refund clause
  • Burden of proof
  • Special damages/loss of profits
  • Costs and interest
Read case analysis
Civil procedure [2026] KEMC 457 (KLR)

Umoja Magharibi Kenya Ltd v Wafula

Umoja Magharibi Kenya Ltd v Wafula (Commercial Case E093 of 2026) [2026] KEMC 457 (KLR) (12 August 2026) (Judgment)

The court compared the pleaded claim with the M-Pesa payment records and found payments totaling Kshs. 74,222 against a claim of Kshs. 65,125, meaning the claim had been fully satisfied and even overpaid. Because no counterclaim was before the court, no refund order could issue; the claim was dismissed with costs to the respondent.

  • Outstanding balance
  • Payment discharge
  • Excess payment
  • Absence of counterclaim
  • Costs
Read case analysis
Civil procedure [2026] SCC 195 (KLR)

Safaricom PLC v Iriaini Tea Factory Company Ltd

Safaricom PLC v Iriaini Tea Factory Company Ltd (Civil Case E038 of 2026) [2026] SCC 195 (KLR) (7 August 2026) (Judgment)

The respondent’s driver was negligent in failing to keep a reasonable distance from the claimant’s vehicle despite daylight visibility and traffic ahead, so the respondent was vicariously liable. The claimant sufficiently proved special damages through assessment, invoice, payment voucher, and related documents, and was therefore entitled to the full claimed amount.

  • Negligence
  • Vicarious liability
  • Rear-end collision
  • Special damages
  • Proof of damages
  • Costs
Read case analysis

About this LexChat collection

Kenya decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.