The High Court in Nairobi has dismissed an appeal by Boma Hotel against a default judgment that order it to pay Sh391,233.89.
The hotel, trading as Red Court Hotel Limited, had sought to reopen Nairobi Milimani Small Claims Court Commercial Case No E326 of 2024, in which Brandables E.A. Limited sued over unpaid invoices.
The supplier stated that the hotel had two distinct unpaid invoices, one for Boma Nairobi and another for Boma in Eldoret, which led to separate suits.
Default judgment was entered on April 16, 2024.
On January 21, 2025 Boma applied to set it aside and to be allowed to defend the claim.
The adjudicator dismissed the application on February 17, 2025, finding the judgment regular, no triable issues and that Boma was deliberately evading justice.
Boma appealed.
The hotel argued that dismissing its application was unfair because it disputed the amount claimed.
It urged the High Court to set aside the default judgment and grant it permission to defend the lawsuit.
Brandables opposed the appeal, maintaining that Boma was “properly served with pleadings and mention notices by email on January 18, 2024, but elected not to file a response or enter an appearance, resulting in the default judgment on April 16, 2024.”
The supplier said it filed two suits because Boma had two separate unpaid invoices, one for Boma Nairobi and another for Boma Eldoret, involving different accounts and amounts.
Brandables described Boma as slow to act, noting that Boma knew about both court orders but paid only the chief magistrate court’s order and left the Small Claims Court order unpaid.
The supplier also said Boma had waited too long to ask for the judgment to be reopened.
In its view, granting the appeal would only help Boma avoid justice and deny Brandables the benefit of the judgment it had won.
Justice Anthony Mrima noted that appeals from the Small Claims Court are strictly limited to matters of law.
He explained that service in the Small Claims Court is governed by its own Act and Rules rather than the standard Civil Procedure Rules.
While these rules do not explicitly allow service by email, Boma lost its right to challenge this method because it filed an appearance in court, making the electronic service legal.
Additionally, the judge found that Boma Hotel failed to present a valid defense to contest the debt, as it never submitted a draft defense.
Finding no merit in the appeal, Justice Mrima dismissed the case with costs.
