When you take a case to the Small Claims Court (SCC) in Kenya, you expect the adjudicator (the person deciding the case) to follow the law.
But sometimes, the court has to use discretion, which means making a fair decision based on the circumstances of the case.
But how should adjudicators exercise this discretion? Should they decide based on their personal opinions?
No!
Court discretion is not about personal preference—it must follow legal principles to ensure fairness and justice.
Let’s break it down into simple terms.
What Does Discretion Mean in the Small Claims Court?
Discretion is the court’s power to decide where the law allows flexibility. For example, an adjudicator may need to decide:
- Whether to set aside a judgment (cancel a previous decision).
- Whether to extend the time for a party to do something.
- Whether to award costs (require one party to pay for the other’s expenses).
These decisions must not be made randomly. Instead, they should be guided by fairness, justice, and the law.
1. When Can a Judgment Be Set Aside?
A judgment is the final decision made by the court. But what if someone didn’t respond to the claim on time? The court might enter a default judgment against them.
Can they request to have it set aside? Yes, but only if they provide evidence that meets the legal conditions.
According to Rule 11(4) of the SCC Rules 2020, the court can set aside a judgment if:
- The default (failure to respond) was unintentional.
- The applicant has a strong defense that could succeed.
- There are good reasons to justify setting aside the judgment.
So, the adjudicator must ensure these conditions are met before granting the request. It’s not about personal feelings—it’s about applying the law correctly.
2. Should the Court Extend Deadlines?
Sometimes, a party may ask for more time to do something in the case. Rule 33 of the SCC allows the court to extend time, but only if it is fair.
Kenya’s Constitution (Article 159(2)) says justice should not be delayed. The SCC is meant to resolve cases quickly—within 60 days—so extensions should only be granted when necessary.
The adjudicator must balance fairness and efficiency. If granting more time will cause unnecessary delays, it may not be justified.
3. Should the Court Award Costs?
Going to court costs money. If you win your case, should the losing party pay for your expenses?
Under Section 3 of the SCC Act, a successful party is entitled to the least expensive method of resolving the dispute. This means the court should consider:
- Has the winning party spent money unnecessarily?
- Did the losing party force them to court without a valid defense?
- Will awarding costs help ensure fairness?
For example, if you had to hire a lawyer because the other side refused to settle a simple case, the court might order them to compensate you. This ensures you don’t suffer unfair expenses.
The Golden Rule: Is the Decision Fair?
Whenever an adjudicator has to use discretion, they should ask themselves:
“Will my decision do real and substantial justice to the parties?”
If the answer is no, then they must reconsider. The goal of the Small Claims Court is to deliver justice—not to favor one party over another.
By following legal guidelines and ensuring fairness, adjudicators can make wise and just decisions that uphold the integrity of the Small Claims Court.
Final Thoughts
The Small Claims Court is fast, fair, and affordable. But with this speed comes the need for careful decision-making. Adjudicators must ensure their discretion is guided by law, fairness, and justice—not personal opinions.
Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. If you need specific legal guidance, talk or chat at 0708111222.