The High Court has upheld a KSH 145,000 judgement in a case that sends a strong message to Kenyans who treat phone agreements as ‘just talks’.

In Fredrick Ochiel v. Kennedy Okoth (2026), the court ruled that WhatsApp chats, phone calls, and conduct between parties can form a legally binding contract, even without a written or signed agreement.

The dispute arose from the leasing of an ultrasound machine. The parties agreed on terms through phone conversations and WhatsApp messages.

The machine was collected, used, and partially paid for but never returned.

When the owner demanded full payment, the defense was simple: there was no formal contract.

The court rejected that argument, finding that the daily charge had been agreed upon and that both parties acted on those terms.

Communication about payment and return, mainly through WhatsApp and SMS, demonstrated what the court described as ‘the meeting of minds.’

In dismissing the appeal, the judge reaffirmed a long-standing principle of contract law: a contract does not have to be written to be enforceable.

“There was no written agreement” was not a valid defence where evidence showed clear offer, acceptance, and consideration.

The court was also firm that it would not intervene to rescue a party from a deal they voluntarily entered into.

“Courts will not rewrite contracts for parties unless there is fraud, coercion, or illegality,” the ruling noted.

For the ordinary mwananchi, the judgment is a powerful warning. A simple agreement made over WhatsApp can carry serious legal and financial consequences.

If you agree on terms, take someone’s property, benefit from it, and promise to pay, the law can hold you to that promise.

“Your messages are not just casual chats; they can become legal evidence,” the court’s reasoning implies.

In today’s digital age, a phone conversation or WhatsApp exchange can create real obligations and a court judgment to match.