Judgment[1999] KECA 57
Case law
Search tips: "exact phrase" · -exclude · land | property · negligen* · citations like [2023] KEHC 123
Division and case type: Constitutional and Human RightsPetition
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT KISUMU (CORAM: OWUOR, J.A. (IN CHAMBERS) CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Suit
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT ELDORET Civil Suit 40 of 1998 MAECEOM CONSULTANTS...........................................................................PLAINTIFF versus KERIO VALLEY DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY.....................................DEFENDANT RULING The defendants herein who are Messrs Kerio Valley Development Authority vide their letter ref KVDA/HQS/PRJ/630/VOL.XVI dated 6/3/97 wrote to the plaintiff Maeceom Consultants. The subject of the letter was valuation of T
Division and case type: Constitutional and Human RightsPetition
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI (NAIROBI LAW COURTS) Winding Up Cause 40 of 1998 In The Matter of Autorec Spares Ltd and In The Matter of Companies Act Ruling. This is an application for injunction.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Suit
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MOMBASA Civil Suit 249 of 1995 KHIMJI'S SECONDHAND MART....................................PLAINTIFF VERSUS TABURA SECURITY AGENCY (K).............................DEFENDANT J U D G M E N T On the 3rd of April, 1995 a plaint was filed in the MombasaHigh Court of Kenya District Registry. The Plaintiff wasdescribed as Kimji's Secondhand Mart - a business firm trading atMombasa.
Division and case type: Constitutional and Human RightsPetition
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI (NAIROBI LAW COURTS) Winding Up Cause 3 of 1996 In The Matter of Kenya National Trading Corporation Ltd and In The Matter of Companies Act Ruling. This is an application to set aside and or review the winding up order of November 3, 1997.
Division and case type: Constitutional and Human RightsPetition
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI (NAIROBI LAW COURTS) Winding Up Cause 12 of 1986 In The Matter of Plastic Products (K) Ltd and In The Matter of The Companies Act, CAP 486 Judgment. By a petition presented in court on 14th May, 1996, Mepal Plastics Kenya Limited, seeks a winding up order against Plastics Products (K) Ltd.
Division and case type: Constitutional and Human RightsPetition
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI CORAM: TUNOI, J.A. (IN CHAMBERS) CIVIL APPLICATION NO.
Division and case type: Constitutional and Human RightsPetition
That according to the company it has repaid the entire loan and has complied with the consent order aforesaid and is disputing the Kshs 7,228,478/85. In any event the company has secured payment due to the Petitioner by a charge over Title No NDUMBERI/NDUMBERI/T.613/30.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Suit
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MOMBASA CIVIL SUIT NO 853 OF 1995 M M …………………........……PLAINTIFF VERSUS D C J ……………………..1ST DEFENDANT V N K ……………………2ND DEFENDANT RULING M M, the Plaintiff herein, seeks an interlocutory injunction to restrain D C J, the 1st Defendant, from contracting a marriage under Marriage Act (Cap. 150) of the Africa Christian Marriage and Divorce Act (Cap.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Suit
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MOMBASA CIVIL SUIT NO 235 OF 1995 KENINDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD ……PLAINTIFF VERSUS BHAI O M AL-AMIN………………..…………..DEFENDANT RULING The Defendant seeks to set aside an ex-parte judgement entered against him in default of appearance. He does not deny that he was served with summons to enter appearance but failed to do so.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Suit
rule 5, make provision for the same remedy he did not think there was any conflict. The two orders merely provide different grounds for the remedy, he said.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Suit
It does not appear to me that they stand to suffer any substantial loss if the orders sought in this application are not granted. I specifically dealt with this matter in my ruling.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Suit
It does not appear to me that they stand to suffer any substantial loss if the orders sought in this application are not granted. I specifically dealt with this matter in my ruling.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Suit
would have been done on October 24, 1990 a day after the hearing and making of garnishee order absolute. That notification would have served no purpose on that date for no fault of the Garnishee who was not served as provided by Rule 1 (2) of the said order.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Suit
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT ELDORET CIVIL SUIT NO. 23 OF 1992 D.M.AMAYAMU..............................................................................................PLAINTIFF VERSUS BENJAMIN K.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Suit
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MOMBASA Civil Suit 299 of 1990 SILAS MIHESO ...................................................................................PLAINTIFF - Versus - MODERN BUSINESS COMMUNICATIONS LIMITED...........DEFENDANT J U D G M E NT In 1984 the plaintiff was employed by the Furniture CentreLtd. But in May he entered into negotiations withthe defendant's managing director..
Division and case type: CivilCivil Suit
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAKURU CIVIL SUIT NO. 375 OF 1992 RICHARD BOYWA GOR................................................................................PLAINTIFF VERSUS EAST AFRICAN SUGAR INDUSTRIES LTD.............................................DEFENDANT
Division and case type: CivilCivil Suit
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MOMBASA Civil Suit 637 of 1990 BROWN M. MULATYA..........................................
Division and case type: CivilCivil Suit
thereafter proceed to hearing de novo. This order has not been yet complied with and the consent order (which gives no time limit) is still there if the parties wish to give effect thereto.
Division and case type: Constitutional and Human RightsPetition
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI (NAIROBI LAW COURTS) Winding Up Cause 38, 39 & 40 of 1991 In the Matter of Avitech Limited, Aircraft Engineering Services Ltd & Rent-A-Plane Ltd and In the Matter of the Companies Act Ruling. Three matters have been raised before me today for clarification.