Harry Karanja, DTM Profile picture
Jun 24, 2022 9 tweets 5 min read Read on X
Our system of law has always been adversarial, which means judicial officers (JOs) mainly listen but do not investigate or examines witnesses. The #SmallClaimsCourt Act changes this by giving the adjudicators broad investigative powers. Are we creating a monster? A thread 🧵 Image
Sections 19 and 32(4) of the SCC Act give the court wide inquisitorial powers which include summoning witnesses, requiring production of documents, researching on its own, and examining witnesses on anything they consider relevant to determine the suit. ImageImage
In addition, Section 17 gives the adjudicator wide discretion on what procedures to adopt in determination of matters as long as those procedures abide by the principles of natural justice Image
It's arguable that these inquisitorial powers are necessary to cut through strict law of evidence hurdles and arrive at the truth, in a way that provides access to justice to all the users of the court, whether it is a publicly listed company or a mama mboga.
But the question is, since several aspects of the #SmallClaimsCourt remain adversarial, will giving adjudicators these inquisitorial powers create a Frankenstein system of law that gets out of control? Is it possible to successfully merge these two systems of law?
Our common law system allows for decisions to be made at the court's discretion. The danger of an inquisitorial JO in this common law system is that the JO can become prejudiced or the litigants can perceive the JO as biased in their decision making. Image
This then creates an avenue for challenging the decisions and potentially moves the #SmallClaimsCourt further and further away from its objective of ensuring access to justice. But I propose that there is a solution...
The #SmallClaimsCourt is in urgent need of practice directions to clarify the situations where the court is allowed to become inquisitorial. This would give all parties clear expectations when the court puts on its investigator hat. ImageImageImage
In conclusion, I believe that the hybrid inquisitorial and adversarial system in the #SmallClaimsCourt is not a monster, at least not yet. But in the absence of practice directions the danger remains in the horizon. Image

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Harry Karanja, DTM

Harry Karanja, DTM Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @harrykaranja

Aug 7
Justice William Musyoka has delivered 7 Bombshells in a scorching judgment and arguably the most comprehensive indictment our justice system's failure to serve ordinary citizens while simultaneously determining that #SmallClaimsCourt judgments delivered after 60 days are null and void. 🧵Image
What began as a debt dispute in became a constitutional earthquake when the judge asked the question: Did the Small Claims Court that decided this case even have legal jurisdiction? His answer reveals systemic constitutional fraud across Kenya's entire judicial system. 1/10new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgmen…
Ulitmately his answer was NO, Section 34(1) creates a 60-day jurisdictional window that if exceeded renders the judgment invalid. But in getting to that conclusion he systematically breaks down why our judicial architecture is dangerously broken 2/10
Read 11 tweets
Apr 13, 2024
Don't have the time to go through all these cases? Don't worry. I gotcha. Here's a thread of the 6 Supreme Court decisions, the key legal issues raised in each, the court's rationale, and its findings. A thread 🧵
1. Harcharan Singh Sehmi & Another vs. Tarabana Company Limited & 5 Others (Petition No. E033 of 2023)
Key Legal Issues: Whether the Law Society of Kenya should be admitted as an interested party.
Court's Rationale: The court concluded that the issues the Law Society of Kenya wished to address were already covered by the arguments of the existing parties. Moreover, the Law Society did not demonstrate a direct and substantial interest that would be directly affected by the outcome, nor did it provide unique arguments that weren't already being made by the other parties. This decision was guided by the principles set out in previous Supreme Court decisions regarding the admission of interested parties.
Decision: The application for joinder was dismissed, and each party was ordered to bear their own costs​​.
2. Manchester Outfitters Suiting Division Ltd vs. Standard Chartered Financial Services Ltd & Another (Petition No. 6 of 2016)
Key Legal Issues: Addressing contempt of court orders and improper conduct by counsel.
Court's Rationale: The court emphasized the importance of adhering to established legal processes for changing representation and condemned the advocates involved for engaging in behavior that contradicted court orders. The court highlighted that such actions undermine the integrity of the judicial process and lead to unnecessary complications in the administration of justice.
Decision: The court struck out the contempt application and criticized the inappropriate conduct of the filing advocates, awarding costs against them for their misconduct​​.
Read 7 tweets
Apr 3, 2024
To find out which is the best Kenyan legal AI, I prompted them with probably the trickiest legal problem:

Who is entitled to inherit an estate between a customary wife, statutory wife, cohabitee, divorcee, and mistress and their parents and children? (Question 3)

I than ranked them in four categories. 1: look and feel; 2: speed; 3: humanness (how human they sound); and accuracy to the law. The results were quite surprising. In no particular order...Image
Image
Image
1. (Wakili AI)

Look and Feel: Very clean interface, good font, spacing and colours. 5/5
Speed: It generated a response immediately after posting. 5/5
Humanness: Used natural language, showed empathy words, and recommended mediation. 5/5
Accuracy: Recognized complexity but then confused dependants and beneficiaries, failed to quote Section 3(5), and ultimately arrived at vague or incorrect conclusions. 1/5Wakili.orgImage
Image
Image
2. (M-Wakili)

Look and Feel: Interface is confusing, can't tell difference between Q/A and Chat. Requires horizontal scrolling to see full page when side menu is opened. Limits chats to 3000 characters 2/5
Speed: Was unable to test. Threw up a network error. 0/5
Humanness: Was unable to test. Threw up a network error. 0/5
Accuracy: Was unable to test. Threw up a network error. 0/5mwakili.co.keImage
Image
Read 14 tweets
Feb 13, 2024
Did you know that there is a mwakenya software for the @SmallClaimsCourt that can help lawyers, laymen, and magistrates predict the decision of any case.

Try it out at and read the thread below to understand how it works, but seek out a lawyer if you need legal advice.bit.ly/sccadjudImage
Image
To ensure that your case is not thrown out before it even starts, the software confirms that the Court has jurisdiction and the parties have legal standing

Image
Image
Image
This part determines what civil wrong you have suffered so that it can guide you on what is required to prove the civil wrong and the likely remedies you can get Image
Read 7 tweets
Oct 31, 2022
Does the #SmallClaimsCourt have jurisdiction to handle claims for refund of security deposits?

This is hotly disputed after Majanja Js ruling in HCCOMMA/E236/22 Christoffersen vs The Random Shop. However the same judge was silent on the issue in Itakura v Odera eKLR
In Civil Appeal No. *E036 Of 2022 Lisa Kristine Christoffersen Versus Kavneet Kaur Sehmi T/A The Random Shop Majanja J held
"In my view, the rent has a specific and known meaning which does not extend to a contract for services."
The disputed issue is whether "rent" can also be equated to "security deposit in a tenancy". Although it was not an issue in dispute in the Itakura v Odera (Civil Appeal E009 of 2022) [2022] eKLR, the good judge also did not go out of his way to address it.
Read 5 tweets
Jun 25, 2022
In less than 60 days you have filed your claim, served it, filed a return of service, attended court, made arguments, court has ruled in your favour, and you've extracted the decree in the #SmallClaimsCourt. But then the debtor tells you "I have no money". What next? 4 tips 🧵
1. Negotiate a payment plan. It's never great to receive a judgment award in bits, but it's far better than not to receive it at all. Formalize it through a formal agreement and incentivize early payment with a reducing balance interest clause in the agreement.
2. Accept less than the judgment as full payment. The easiest candidates to let go of are court awarded interest and costs, but you might also consider accepting a portion of the principal judgment if in your case a bird in hand is worth two in the bush.
Read 6 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(