Court rules on Small Court claims jurisdiction

The High Court ruled that the 60-day timeline for determining cases under the Small Claims Court Act does not automatically strip a court of jurisdiction.

In a judgment delivered on December 1, 2025, lady Justice Asenath Ongeri dismissed an appeal by Dennis Wachenje Maghanga and upheld a ruling of the Nairobi Small Claims Court reinstating a claim filed by Abeid Walid Alias.

The court found that although Section 34 of the Small Claims Court Act directs that matters be determined within 60 days, the timeline is not a “self-executing guillotine” that extinguishes jurisdiction once it lapses, particularly where delays are attributable to court processes rather than litigants.

Justice Ongeri further held that a minor error in the reinstatement application regarding the date of dismissal did not prejudice the appellant and was a procedural technicality curable under Article 159(2)(d) of the Constitution.

The High Court upheld the reinstatement ruling and ordered that the small claims case proceed to hearing afresh before a different adjudicator, subject to the respondent paying Sh20,000 in thrown-away costs.

“To use the very mechanism designed to ensure expeditious justice as a technical doorway to eject a legitimate claim would be to defeat the entire spirit of the Act,” ruled the court.

The case arose from a dispute filed at the Nairobi Small Claims Court in 2022 between Abeid Walid Alias and Dennis Wachenje Maghanga.

The matter was initially heard and directions issued for the parties to proceed by way of written submissions, with judgment scheduled for December 1, 2023.

However, the claim was dismissed in April 2023 for non-attendance.

Abeid Walid Alias subsequently filed an application seeking to have the suit reinstated.

In a ruling delivered on December 1, 2023, the Small Claims Court set aside the dismissal and reinstated the suit, directing that it proceed to hearing afresh.

Aggrieved by that decision, Dennis Wachenje Maghanga appealed to the High Court, arguing that the Small Claims Court lacked jurisdiction to reinstate the matter after the lapse of the 60-day statutory period under the Small Claims Court Act and that the reinstatement was based on factual errors.