( In Respect of the Amended OS dated 29 th October, 2025)
Introduction
1. The Amended Originating Summons dated 29/10/2025 (originally dated 21/10/2025) was brought by the Applicant under the Foreign Judgments (Reciprocal Enforcement) Act seeking registration and enforcement in Kenya of an agreed judgment entered on 28/11/2024 by the High Court of Malawi, Commercial Division, Balantyre Registry, in Commercial Case No. 131 of 2024.
2. The application was supported by the affidavit of Bernadette Mnyanga sworn on 29/10/2025. She deposed that the Applicant entered into a contract with the Respondents in October 2022 for the respondents to supply (Automated Teller Machines) ATM to the Applicant. The applicant paid USD 207,704, to the Respodents but the Respondents failed to deliver the machines.
3. Following unsuccessful attempts to resolve the dispute, the Applicant instituted proceedings before the High Court of Malawi. During those proceedings, the Respondents proposed to refund the sums by quarterly installments of USD 23,000, culminating in a consent that was adopted as an agreed judgment of the court on 28/11/2024.
4. Despite the judgment, the Respondents allegedly failed to honour their repayment obligations. The deponent further stated that the 2 nd Respondent maintained a USD account with the Garnishee, that enforcement of the judgment in Malawi had proved difficult because the Respondents were Kenyan nationals, and that the Applicant was therefore compelled to seek registration and enforcement of the foreign judgment in Kenya under the Foreign Judgments (Reciprocal Enforcement) Act. She maintained that the application had been filed without undue delay and that the Respondents would suffer no prejudice if the orders sought were granted.
5. At the time of writing this ruling, the Respondents had not filed pleadings in opposition to the instant application despite proof of service vide the Affidavit of Service sworn on 13/5/2026. The Applicant in support of its application, has filed written submissions dated 23/4/2026.
Analysis and determination
6. I have considered the Application before court and the submissions filed by the Applicant. This is an application seeking the registration and enforcement of a foreign judgement which is governed by the Foreign Judgements (Reciprocal Enforcement) Act (the Act) .
7. Section 3(1) of the Act provides that a judgment obtained in a superior court of a reciprocating country may, on application to the High Court, be registered and thereafter enforced as if it were a judgment of the High Court, provided that the judgment is final, conclusive, and relates to a definite sum of money.
8. Section 5(1) and (4) of the Act provide the following:
“ (1) Where a judgment to which this Act applies has been given in a designated court, the judgment creditor may apply to the High Court to have that judgment registered within six years of the date of the judgment or, where there have been proceedings by way of appeal against the judgment, of the date of the last judgment in the proceedings .
…
(4) An application for registration of a judgment under subsection (1) shall—
(a) be accompanied by a certificate in the form set out in the Schedule or to the same effect issued from the original court under its seal and signed by a judge or registrar thereof or by an affidavit to the same effect;
(b) have attached thereto the judgment or the exemplification or a certified or duly authenticated copy thereof and, where the judgment is not in the English language, certified by a notary public on the Registrar of the original court or authenticated by affidavit;
(c) be accompanied by an affidavit stating—
(i) that, at the date of application, the judgment has not been satisfied or, as the case may be, the sums or items of movable property in respect of which the judgment remains unsatisfied;
(ii) that, at the date of application, the judgment can be enforced by execution in the country of the original court;
(iii) where, by virtue of section 6(5), the judgment may be registered only in respect of certain of its provisions, the provisions in respect of which it is sought to register the judgment;
(d) unless otherwise ordered by the High Court, be accompanied, in the case of a judgment given by a superior court of a Commonwealth country, by a certificate under the seal and signed by a judge or registrar thereof certifying that the court is a superior court in that country;
(e) be accompanied by such other evidence as may be prescribed.”
9. Under the schedule to the Foreign Judgements (Reciprocal Enforcement) (Extension of Act) Order , reciprocating countries for the purposes of the Act include Malawi.
10. In the instant case, the applicant has attached a copy of the endorsed judgment, an affidavit indicating that the Respondents were served with the said judgment and that the decretal amount has not been settled as decreed despite direct communication with the Respondents, there is no indication that any Appeal had been preferred against the Judgment and that while the judgment is executable in Malawi, the Respondents are Kenyans and hence the need to enforce it in Kenya.
11. The judgement was final and conclusive having ordered the Respondents to pay a definite sum of USD 207,740 to the Applicant in nine instalments over a period of time. The Application was filed on 29/10/2025 which is within 6 years of the date that the judgement, which was delivered on 24/11/2024.
12. In a similar application in Mega Business Services Ltd v Exxone Solutions Ltd (Civil Suit E029 of 2021) [2025] KEHC 16528 (KLR) this court held that the Rwanda is a reciprocating country under the relevant Rules; that the Commercial High Court of Rwanda qualifies as a superior court for purposes of the Act; that the foreign judgments were final and conclusive ; that the claims related to definite monetary sums ; that the Respondent had been duly served; that there was no pending appeal or review in Rwanda and that the application had been brought within the applicable six-year limitation period and the court consequently ordered that the two Rwandan judgments be recognized and registered as judgments of the High Court of Kenya and be enforceable in Kenya as though they were judgments of the Kenyan court.
13. Based on the foregoing affidavit evidence, I am satisfied that the Applicant has met the statutory requirements under the Act. I therefore grant the application as sought. The Judgement delivered on 28/11/2024 by the High Court of Malawi, Commercial Division, Balantyre Registry, in Commercial Case No. 131 of 2024, is hereby recognised and registered as a judgement of the court under section 6(1) of the Act. The judgement is therefore enforceable in Kenya as if it was a judgement of this court.
Ruling delivered, dated and signed virtually at Nairobi
this 18 th day of September, 2026.
In the Presence of :
Lispa – Court Assistant
Mr Gachuiri ……………… for the Applicant
N/A……………………… for the Respondent
Introduction
1. The Amended Originating Summons dated 29/10/2025 (originally dated 21/10/2025) was brought by the Applicant under the Foreign Judgments (Reciprocal Enforcement) Act seeking registration and enforcement in Kenya of an agreed judgment entered on 28/11/2024 by the High Court of Malawi, Commercial Division, Balantyre Registry, in Commercial Case No. 131 of 2024.
2. The application was supported by the affidavit of Bernadette Mnyanga sworn on 29/10/2025. She deposed that the Applicant entered into a contract with the Respondents in October 2022 for the respondents to supply (Automated Teller Machines) ATM to the Applicant. The applicant paid USD 207,704, to the Respodents but the Respondents failed to deliver the machines.
3. Following unsuccessful attempts to resolve the dispute, the Applicant instituted proceedings before the High Court of Malawi. During those proceedings, the Respondents proposed to refund the sums by quarterly installments of USD 23,000, culminating in a consent that was adopted as an agreed judgment of the court on 28/11/2024.
4. Despite the judgment, the Respondents allegedly failed to honour their repayment obligations. The deponent further stated that the 2 nd Respondent maintained a USD account with the Garnishee, that enforcement of the judgment in Malawi had proved difficult because the Respondents were Kenyan nationals, and that the Applicant was therefore compelled to seek registration and enforcement of the foreign judgment in Kenya under the Foreign Judgments (Reciprocal Enforcement) Act. She maintained that the application had been filed without undue delay and that the Respondents would suffer no prejudice if the orders sought were granted.
5. At the time of writing this ruling, the Respondents had not filed pleadings in opposition to the instant application despite proof of service vide the Affidavit of Service sworn on 13/5/2026. The Applicant in support of its application, has filed written submissions dated 23/4/2026.
Analysis and determination
6. I have considered the Application before court and the submissions filed by the Applicant. This is an application seeking the registration and enforcement of a foreign judgement which is governed by the Foreign Judgements (Reciprocal Enforcement) Act (the Act) .
7. Section 3(1) of the Act provides that a judgment obtained in a superior court of a reciprocating country may, on application to the High Court, be registered and thereafter enforced as if it were a judgment of the High Court, provided that the judgment is final, conclusive, and relates to a definite sum of money.
8. Section 5(1) and (4) of the Act provide the following:
“ (1) Where a judgment to which this Act applies has been given in a designated court, the judgment creditor may apply to the High Court to have that judgment registered within six years of the date of the judgment or, where there have been proceedings by way of appeal against the judgment, of the date of the last judgment in the proceedings .
…
(4) An application for registration of a judgment under subsection (1) shall—
(a) be accompanied by a certificate in the form set out in the Schedule or to the same effect issued from the original court under its seal and signed by a judge or registrar thereof or by an affidavit to the same effect;
(b) have attached thereto the judgment or the exemplification or a certified or duly authenticated copy thereof and, where the judgment is not in the English language, certified by a notary public on the Registrar of the original court or authenticated by affidavit;
(c) be accompanied by an affidavit stating—
(i) that, at the date of application, the judgment has not been satisfied or, as the case may be, the sums or items of movable property in respect of which the judgment remains unsatisfied;
(ii) that, at the date of application, the judgment can be enforced by execution in the country of the original court;
(iii) where, by virtue of section 6(5), the judgment may be registered only in respect of certain of its provisions, the provisions in respect of which it is sought to register the judgment;
(d) unless otherwise ordered by the High Court, be accompanied, in the case of a judgment given by a superior court of a Commonwealth country, by a certificate under the seal and signed by a judge or registrar thereof certifying that the court is a superior court in that country;
(e) be accompanied by such other evidence as may be prescribed.”
9. Under the schedule to the Foreign Judgements (Reciprocal Enforcement) (Extension of Act) Order , reciprocating countries for the purposes of the Act include Malawi.
10. In the instant case, the applicant has attached a copy of the endorsed judgment, an affidavit indicating that the Respondents were served with the said judgment and that the decretal amount has not been settled as decreed despite direct communication with the Respondents, there is no indication that any Appeal had been preferred against the Judgment and that while the judgment is executable in Malawi, the Respondents are Kenyans and hence the need to enforce it in Kenya.
11. The judgement was final and conclusive having ordered the Respondents to pay a definite sum of USD 207,740 to the Applicant in nine instalments over a period of time. The Application was filed on 29/10/2025 which is within 6 years of the date that the judgement, which was delivered on 24/11/2024.
12. In a similar application in Mega Business Services Ltd v Exxone Solutions Ltd (Civil Suit E029 of 2021) [2025] KEHC 16528 (KLR) this court held that the Rwanda is a reciprocating country under the relevant Rules; that the Commercial High Court of Rwanda qualifies as a superior court for purposes of the Act; that the foreign judgments were final and conclusive ; that the claims related to definite monetary sums ; that the Respondent had been duly served; that there was no pending appeal or review in Rwanda and that the application had been brought within the applicable six-year limitation period and the court consequently ordered that the two Rwandan judgments be recognized and registered as judgments of the High Court of Kenya and be enforceable in Kenya as though they were judgments of the Kenyan court.
13. Based on the foregoing affidavit evidence, I am satisfied that the Applicant has met the statutory requirements under the Act. I therefore grant the application as sought. The Judgement delivered on 28/11/2024 by the High Court of Malawi, Commercial Division, Balantyre Registry, in Commercial Case No. 131 of 2024, is hereby recognised and registered as a judgement of the court under section 6(1) of the Act. The judgement is therefore enforceable in Kenya as if it was a judgement of this court.
Ruling delivered, dated and signed virtually at Nairobi
this 18 th day of September, 2026.
In the Presence of :
Lispa – Court Assistant
Mr Gachuiri ……………… for the Applicant
N/A……………………… for the Respondent