Judgment[1998] KECA 143
Case law
Search tips: "exact phrase" · -exclude · land | property · negligen* · citations like [2023] KEHC 123
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
decision of Lakha, J.A., a learned single judge of this Court, to seek to vary, discharge or reverse his order by the Court under the provisions of rule 54 (2) of the Rules. Oraro has submitted that the respondent having not chosen any of those options he cannot now challenge the consent order which he has not attempted to have set aside.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI (CORAM: OMOLO, SHAH & PALL, JJ.A.) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 292 OF 1997 BETWEEN SAMUEL NGURE GATHII.......................................APPELLANT AND JOSEPHINE WANJIRU MBUGUA................................RESPONDENT (Being an appeal from the judgment of the High Court of Kenya at Nairobi (Hon.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI (CORAM: TUNOI, SHAH & PALL, JJ.A.) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 75 OF 1997 BETWEEN KENYA CEMENT MARKETING LIMITED............................................APPELLANT AND JAMES G.K.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
This is one of the exceptions to the general rule that a party against whom an ex parte order has been made can only apply to the court which made the order to set it aside.”. This court, in its more recent decision in the case of Michael Miana and K.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF KENYA AT NAIROBI Civil Appeal 112 of 1995 GERALD MBALE MWEA ……………................................................ …………………………..APPELLANT AND KARIKO KIHARA GICHOMO KIHARA ……………………........................................…………………….
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI CIVIL APPEAL NO. 182 OF 1994 MACHAKOS DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE UNION LIMITED……….........APPELLANT AND PHILIP NZUKI KIILU…………………....................................................RESPONDENT (Appeal from a judgment of the High Court of Kenya at Machakos (Honourable Mr.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI CORAM: GICHERU, AKIWUMI & SHAH, JJ.A.) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 15 OF 1992 KENYA BUS SERVICES lIMITED...........................................................APPELLANT AND SUSAN MUTETI...................................................................................RESPONDENT (Appeal from the Ruling of the High Court of Kenya at Nairobi (Mr.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF KENYA AT NAKURU Civil Appeal 66 or 1995 CLEMENT J. MACHARIA …………………….....................................
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI (CORAM: GICHERU, TUNOI & LAKHA, JJ.A) CIVIL APPEAL NO. AGGARWAL Suing in his capacity as executor of Late Lekraj Aggarwal..................................................APPELLANT AND MUNSHIRAM & COMPANY LIMITED....................RESPONDENT (Appeal from the Judgment of the High Court of Kenya at Nairobi (Mr.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI (Coram:A.B. SHAH) CIVIL APPEAL 149 OF 1991 BETWEEN JOSEPHOCHIENG PHILIPKAFUANDE HENRY HEGGA (Trading as AQUILINE AGENCIES)…....................APPELLANTS VERSUS FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF CHICAGO.................
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI ( Coram: Gachuhi,Cockar & Omolo JJ A ) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 55 OF 1986 BETWEEN NGORORO...............................................................................APPELLANT AND NDUTHA & ANOTHER.....................................................RESPONDENTS (Appeal from the ruling of the High Court of Kenya at Nairobi of the Chief Justice the Honourable Mr Justice Simpson delivered on 9th August, 1985) in HCCC No 3350 of 1984) *********************************
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
There was no evidence of service of the order 2. Neither the order nor the notice of motion nor any other notice in connection therewith that was served carried an indorsement of penal obligation or consequence.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
That evidence so far as it was adduced by the respondent fell foul of the requirements of rule 5 of Order 75: it failed to establish that the appellant was “the relevant “person”. The upshot of that is that the High Court did not have admiralty jurisdiction and the respondent was not entitled to invoke that jurisdiction.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT KISUMU (Coram: Platt, Apaloo JJA & Masime Ag JA) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 170 OF 1986 BETWEEN OKONG’O...........................................................................APPELLANT AND ATTORNEY-GENERAL & ANOTHER..............................RESPONDENT
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI (CORAM: NYARANGI, PLATT & GACHUHI JJA) CIVIL APPLICATION NO. NAI 18 OF 1987 OTIENO……………………………… APPLICANT VERSUS OUGO & ANOTHER….…………..RESPONDENT (Application for stay of execution pending an appeal in the High Court at Nairobi, Bosire J)