Judgment[1997] KECA 398
Case law
Search tips: "exact phrase" · -exclude · land | property · negligen* · citations like [2023] KEHC 123
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
that the learned trial Judge improperly exercised his discretion in declining to set aside his order dismissing the appellants case and the ex parte judgement. In the result we allow the appeal, set aside both the ex parte order of dismissal and he ex parte judgement on the counterclaim and order that the claim and the counterclaim do proceed to hearing in the superior court.
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 AT NAIROBI (CORAM: SHAH, J.A. (IN CHAMBERS)) CIVIL APPLICATION NO.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT MOMBASA (CORAM: GACHUHI, OMOLO & LAKHA, JJ.A.) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 83 OF 1995 BETWEEN BAMBURI PORTLAND CEMENT CO.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT MOMBASA (CORAM: GACHUHI, OMOLO & LAKHA, JJ.A.) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 83 OF 1995 BETWEEN BAMBURI PORTLAND CEMENT CO.
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 NAIROBI (Coram: Apaloo, Masime JJA & Gicheru Ag JA) CIVIL APPEAL NO 12 OF 1987 BETWEEN CHEGE.......................................................... APPELLANT AND SULEIMAN...................................................RESPONDENT (Appeal against the ruling of the High Court at Nairobi, Kwach CA) RULING July 13, 1988, Apaloo, Masime JJA & Gicheru Ag JA delivered the following Ruling.
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
Madede & another v Fita & 2 others (Civil Appeal 4 of 1986) [1988] KECA 108 (KLR) (12 April 1988) (Judgment) Madede & another v Ainea Fita & 2 others [1988] eKLR Neutral citation: [1988] KECA 108 (KLR) REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT KISUMU CIVIL APPEAL 4 OF 1986 JO NYARANGI, JM GACHUHI & FK APALOO, JJA APRIL 12, 1988 BETWEEN MADEDE & ANOTHER & ANOTHER ............................................... APPELLANT AND AINEA FITA ............................................................
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)