Ngure v Two NK Holding Investment Group Limited (Commercial Case E054 of 2025) [2026] SCC 8 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan Small Claims Court allowed a debtor to pay in just two instalments, rejecting a late 9-month plan filed only after their property was proclaimed for execution.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether the order for payment in instalments can be granted.
- 2.Whether costs should be awarded and to who.
Key legal issues
#Whether payment of the decretal sum in instalments can be granted
Although the application was late, made only after proclamation, and non-compliant with Rule 27(2)(a-c) of the SCC Rules, the court reluctantly allowed it on its own terms - two equal instalments with liberty to execute on default.
The court held that instalment applications should be made within reasonable time after judgment, not when execution is imminent. Judgment was delivered on 8/10/2025 with a 30-day stay; the application was filed on 16/12/2025 only after the judgment debtor was proclaimed. The proposed 9-month schedule of Kshs.100,000/= monthly was grossly unreasonable, and no evidence of income, assets or liabilities was disclosed as required by Rule 27(2)(a-c). Despite these defects, the court, in its discretion, reluctantly permitted payment in two equal instalments with a default clause protecting the claimant.
Whether costs should be awarded and to who
Each party to bear its own costs, because the application was allowed only reluctantly despite strenuous opposition.
The Adjudicator restated that costs follow the event, but that the principle compensates the successful party rather than penalizing the losing one. Since the application, though opposed strenuously, was allowed reluctantly and on terms different from those sought, the fair outcome was that each party bear its own costs of the application.
Legal principles established
#- Applications for payment of the decretal sum in instalments should be made promptly after judgment, within reasonable time, and not deployed to forestall execution.
- An instalment application must comply with Rule 27(2)(a-c) of the SCC Rules, including disclosure of the debtor's income, assets and liabilities.
- Costs follow the event and are compensatory, not penal.
Court orders
#- 1.The application dated 16/12/25 is allowed
- 2.The decretal sum be paid in 2 equal instalments, the 1st instalment payable on or before 31/1/2026 and the second instalment payable 30 days thereafter
- 3.In default of payment of any instalment, the claimant shall be at liberty to execute for any balance thereof
- 4.Each party to bear its own costs of the application
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Rule 27(2)(a-c) of the Small Claims Court Rules (payment of decretal sum in instalments)
Relief refused
#Stay of execution pending payment of instalments as sought (monthly instalments of Kshs.100,000/= over 9 months)
The court found the proposal grossly unreasonable, brought late only after proclamation, and non-compliant with Rule 27(2)(a-c) of the SCC Rules, and instead substituted its own terms of two equal instalments.
Costs
Each party to bear its own costs of the application.
Quotable passages
#Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.
The idea behind this provision in the Act was to aid a judgment debtor to pay the decretal sum in portions that he or she will manage without necessarily denying the decree holder the fruits of his judgement and in my view it should be pleaded as soon as the judgement is delivered and not when execution is imminent as it is the case herein.
The idea by parties to run to this prayer as soon as they are proclaimed should be frowned upon and this court will not countenance such mischievous applications.
Let the decretal sum be paid in 2 equal instalments with the 1st instalment payable on or before 31/1/2026 and the second instalment payable 30 days thereafter.
That in default of payment of any instalment, the claimant shall be at liberty to execute for any balance thereof.
Each party to bear its own costs of the application.
Issues in the judgment
#The opposing affidavit is described as sworn on 7/1/2025, which precedes the application dated 16/12/2025; this appears to be a typographical error for 7/1/2026.
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Ngure v Two NK Holding Investment Group Limited (Commercial Case E054 of 2025) [2026] SCC 8 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Not stated in the judgment (application dated 16/12/2025). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/scc/2026/8/eng@2026-01-16
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.