Judgment[1997] KECA 124
Case law
Search tips: "exact phrase" · -exclude · land | property · negligen* · citations like [2023] KEHC 123
Division and case type: GeneralUnclassified
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NYERI (CORAM: TUNOI, SHAH & PALL, JJ.A.) CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 329 OF 1995 BETWEEN KITHAKA NTHAKANIO ..................................
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Case
I make no finding on theactions of Sebastian as his case abated upon his death pendingconclusion of the trial. The case against Mwakalamu KISHUSHU has not been proved beyondreasonable doubt and I find him not guilty.
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Case
I make no finding on theactions of Sebastian as his case abated upon his death pendingconclusion of the trial. The case against Mwakalamu KISHUSHU has not been proved beyondreasonable doubt and I find him not guilty.
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MOMBASA Criminal Case 49 of 1995 REPUBLIC…………………....………..………………..PROSECUTOR VERSUS CHARO NZAI KATANA..........................
Division and case type: GeneralUnclassified
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI (CORAM: LAKHA, J.A. (IN CHAMBERS) CIVIL APPLICATION NO.
Division and case type: GeneralUnclassified
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI (CORAM: LAKHA, J.A. (IN CHAMBERS) (CIVIL APPLICATION NO.
Division and case type: GeneralUnclassified
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI (CORAM: AKIWUMI, PALL, JJ.A. & BOSIRE, AG.J.A.) CIVIL APPLICATION NO.
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI (CORAM: OMOLO, LAKHA JJ.A. J.A.) CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.
Division and case type: GeneralUnclassified
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI CORAM: (BOSIRE AG. JA (IN CHAMBERS) CIVIL APPLICATION NO.
Division and case type: GeneralUnclassified
Upon this, we do not consider that they have an arguable appeal to this Court against the order of the superior which they now seek to have stayed under rule 5 2(b) of the Rules of this Court pending hearing and disposal of their intended appeal. In the result, we think that the two consolidated applications are unmeritorious and the same are dismissed with costs to the respondent.
Division and case type: GeneralUnclassified
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI (CORAM: OMOLO, LAKHA JJ.A. J.A.) CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MOMBASA CRIMINAL CASE NO 638 OF 1992 ABEDINEGO MUTISO MUSYOKI …………..APPELLANT VERSUS REPUBLIC……………………..............……RESPONDENT
Division and case type: GeneralUnclassified
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI CORAM: TUNOI, J.A. (IN CHAMBERS) CIVIL APPLICATION NO.
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Case
then ordered that the said occupants be summoned to appear before it to show cause why a closing order should not be made. The affected tenants duly appeared before the Court including an employee of the applicant known as Harrison Mulwa.
Division and case type: GeneralUnclassified
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI CORAM: MULI, J.A. (IN CHAMBERS) CIVIL APPLICATION NO.
Division and case type: GeneralUnclassified
REPUBLIC OF KENYA Ahmed v Republic High Court, at Mombasa Mbaluto J December 14, 1992, Mbaluto J delivered the following Ruling. The applicant was convicted in the court below of causing death by obstruction contrary to section 46 of the Traffic Act.
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI MILIMANI LAW COURTS CRIMINAL CASE NO.44 OF 1991 TOM PIEMO OMBURA …………) SHIKUDHANI AJWANG RUMAYA ………………. ACCUSEDS VERSUS REPUBLIC ………………… ………………… ……….
Division and case type: GeneralUnclassified
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI CRIMINAL REVISIONAL ORDER NO 1A OF 1991 SAMWEL NJUGUNA GITHINJI ........................APPLICANT VERSUS REPUBLIC......................................................RESPONDENT ORDER IN REVISION. This is a criminal revision case under s 364 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Case
The intention as can be detected from the evidence was to beat the two boys in order to get them to produce the money. The next question is whether the intention to beat or chastise the deceased and Crispo so that they produce the stolen money was a common intention shared by all the four accused persons at the time they were beating the two boys.
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT KISUMU crim apps 235,236,238 of 90 GARI & 2 OTHERS………..…………..PLAINTIFF V REPUBLIC……………………….………DEFENDANT ed) (From Original Conviction and Sentence of the Principal Magistrate’s Court at Kisumu (C.O. Ong’undi, Esq, P.M.) in Criminal Case No 189 of 1989) Evidence – secondary evidence – notice to produce a document – Evidence Act (cap 80) section 69 – to whom such notice is given – when such notice can be dispensed with – party who does not have po