Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Kenya decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The High Court dismissed an appeal from the Small Claims Court, holding that the email service challenge failed and that no triable issue was shown to reopen the default judgment.
Munala v Oness Pele Ltd (Civil Suit E174 of 2025) [2026] KEMC 823 (KLR) (19 August 2026) (Ruling)
The court found that summons to enter appearance had been properly served on 24/10/2025 through WhatsApp to mobile number 0731 269400, a contact linked in the police abstract to the defendant’s vehicle and admittedly belonging to the defendant’s director. Service on the director therefore amounted to valid service on the company under Order 5 rule 3(a). The ex parte judgment was therefore regular. However, in exercise of discretion and influenced by the plaintiff’s alternative prayer, the court granted conditional leave to defend, requiring the defendant to pay Kshs. 20,000 in throw-away cost…
Source excerpt
Afro Drip Limited v Racharky Construction Limited & another (Commercial Appeal E007 of 2025) [2026] KEHC 12977 (KLR) (Commercial and Tax) (12 August 2026) (Judgment)
The appeal succeeded because the magistrate wrongly set aside a regular interlocutory judgment while a valid consent order, adopted by the court and never sought to be set aside, remained binding; the respondents did not credibly disprove service, did not file a draft defence, and advanced no lawful basis to disturb the consent or the judgment.
Source excerpt
Whitehorse Carriers Ltd v Wambulwa (Appeal E084 of 2026) [2026] KEHC 12365 (KLR) (31 July 2026) (Ruling)
The applicant satisfied the requirements for stay of execution pending appeal because the appeal raised a bona fide issue on service and ex parte judgment, the application was brought without unreasonable delay, and the applicant expressed willingness to provide security. To balance the respondent’s right to enjoy the judgment with the need to preserve the appeal, the court granted stay, restrained dealings with the attached motor vehicle, ordered its release upon payment of lawful auctioneer charges and storage fees, and required deposit of the entire decretal sum in a joint interest-earning…
Source excerpt
Northern Construction Company Ltd & 3 others v KCB Bank Kenya Limited (Civil Application E091 of 2025) [2026] KECA 1525 (KLR) (31 July 2026) (Ruling)
The applicants failed to satisfy either limb of Rule 5(2)(b). The intended appeal was not shown to be arguable because the complaint centered on a discretionary decision that was supported by evidence of service and regular default judgment. The nugatory limb also failed because the decree was monetary, the respondent’s financial capacity to refund was unrebutted, and the applicants offered no security. Stay was therefore refused.
Source excerpt
Infinity Industrial Park Limited v Bank of Baroda (Kenya) Limited (Commercial Case E322 of 2024) [2026] KEHC 12321 (KLR) (Commercial and Tax) (31 July 2026) (Ruling)
The court found that the Defendant had entered appearance, participated in interlocutory proceedings, and was expressly granted leave to file a defence but failed to do so. The judgment was therefore regular, and the Defendant’s sole explanation—non-service of summons—was not credible in light of its participation and failure to comply with the court’s timeline. Because no satisfactory explanation for the delay was given, the presence of alleged triable issues did not justify setting aside the judgment. The application was dismissed.
Source excerpt
Osumo v County Government of Nyamira (Civil Appeal E029 of 2026) [2026] KEHC 13255 (KLR) (30 July 2026) (Ruling)
High Court allowed a stay of proceedings pending appeal, finding the challenge to service of summons arguable and holding that continued proceedings could render the appeal nugatory.
National Transport and Safety Authority v Njenga & another (Civil Appeal E1200 of 2025) [2026] KEHC 12764 (KLR) (Civ) (30 July 2026) (Judgment)
The Appellant was duly served with summons and pleadings, so the interlocutory judgment entered against it was regular. The complaint about missing mention notices did not invalidate the judgment. Because the Appellant waited more than a year, gave no satisfactory explanation for its default, and placed before the trial court only generalized denials rather than a bona fide defence, the magistrate properly declined to set aside the judgment. No constitutional or statutory provision excused that default, and no basis existed for appellate interference with the exercise of discretion.
Source excerpt
Machira & another v Micha (Suing for and on behalf of the Estate of Brian Ngari Micha - Deceased) (Civil Appeal E034 of 2023) [2026] KEHC 12640 (KLR) (30 July 2026) (Judgment)
Service on the 1st Appellant was sufficiently proved on the record, but service on the 2nd Appellant was not proved because no authority was shown for the 1st Appellant to accept service on his behalf. The trial court also erred by treating lack of cross-examination as conclusive proof of service and by finally determining the merits of the draft defence at an interlocutory stage. The default judgment against the 2nd Appellant was therefore irregular and the draft defence in any event disclosed triable issues, so the ruling could not stand.
Source excerpt
Kemama v Qona Deposit Taking Sacco Society (Safaricom Sacco Ltd) & another (Civil Appeal E004 of 2026) [2026] KEHC 12632 (KLR) (Civ) (30 July 2026) (Ruling)
The Respondents proved proper service through affidavits and documentary evidence of personal, WhatsApp, and email service, and the Applicant did not rebut that evidence or explain her default. The Tribunal judgment was therefore regular, no basis existed to set it aside, and the Applicant also failed to demonstrate substantial loss or a prima facie case for stay or injunction.
Source excerpt
Explore more
