Judgment[2010] KECA 40
Ali Ahmed Naji v Lutheran World Federation
Court of Appeal at Nairobi
Case law
Search tips: "exact phrase" · -exclude · land | property · negligen* · citations like [2023] KEHC 123
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI CIVIL APPEAL NO. 18 OF 2003 ALI AHMED NAJI ……………………………..……………..
Division and case type: Milimani Commercial CourtsCivil Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI MILIMANI COMMERCIAL COURTS CIVIL CASE NO. 731 OF 2003 ALEX KIARIE THIRU.......................................................................................................PLAINTIFF VERSUS CANNON ASSURANCE (K) LIMITED .......................................................................DEFENDANT
Division and case type: Milimani Commercial CourtsCivil Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI (MILIMANI COMMERCIAL COURTS) Civil Case 39 of 2005 JAYNTILAL DHAMSHI GOSRANI ……………………….PLAINTIFF VERSUS KENYA OIL COMPANY LTD.
Division and case type: Milimani Commercial CourtsCivil Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI (MILIMANI COMMERCIAL COURTS) Civil Case 616 of 2009 DR. MAINA MWEA T/A SPAX PUB & RESTAURANT ......................................................PLAINTIFF VERSUS GEORGE KIMANI NJUKI ………………..…………… ………...1ST DEFENDANT GEPRGE WAINAINA REBO…………………………………….2ND DEFENDANT RULING 1.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NYERI Civil Case 29 of 2007 FRIDAH NYAGUTHII MUNENE…………......…….PLAINTIFF Versus PETER MURIITHI KINGAU....…………........1ST DEFENDANT BERNARD KARERU KAROKI…………..….2ND DEFENDANT PHYLIS WANJIRA KANGANGI……….……3RD DEFENDANT J U D G M E N T This is a suit instituted by way of an amended plaint dated 23rd May, 2007 and filed in court on the same day through Messrs Rika & Co. In that amended plaint, Frida Nyaguthii Munene, hereinafter referred
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI (NAIROBI LAW COURTS) Civil Appeal 860 of 2004 BLUESHIELD INSURANCE CO. LTD……...…APPELLANT VERSUS SAMUEL NYAGA NGURUKIRI…..…………..RESPONDENT J U D G M E N T 1.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Case
On the setting aside the courts dismissal orders . The Plaintiff and through his advocate gave an explanation that the service upon him had been done by registered post to the advocate.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI (NAIROBI LAW COURTS) Civil Case 2772 of 1997 ALLAN S. REYNOLDS .................................................PLAINTIFF V E R S U S TWIGA CHEMICALS INDUSTRIES LTD...............DEFENDANT R U L I N G On 3rd October, 2008 the court (Waweru, J) conditionally allowed an application herein for stay of execution of decree pending appeal.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF KENYA AT MOMBASA Civil Appeal (Appli) 164 of 2005 ABDULSHAKOOR KHANDWALLA…………APPLICANT/RESPONDENT AND EAST AFRICAN BUILDING SOCIETY……..RESPONDENT/APPELLANT (Application to strike out record of appeal in an appeal from the ruling and order of the High Court of Kenya at Mombasa (Maraga J) dated 11th June, 2004 in H.C.C.C. 30 OF 1994) ******************** RULING OF THE COURT This is an application under Rule 80 of the Court of Appeal Rules (Rules) for
Division and case type: CivilCivil Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI (NAIROBI LAW COURTS) Civil Case 862 of 2004 ALBERT KIRUTHI MUKABI (T/a PIPELINE HARDWARE)...PLAINTIFF V E R S U S CITY COUNCIL OF NAIROBI ..............................................DEFENDANT R U L I N G It is conceded by the Plaintiff’s learned counsel that this suit can no longer be maintained. This is because of the expiry of the Plaintiff’s trading licence on or about the 31st December, 2004 upon which the suit was based.
Division and case type: Milimani Commercial CourtsCivil Case
Plaintiffs case when she observed that the Plaintiffs had not shown a prima facie case that the orders sought in their plaint could be granted. On the basis of a letter by Kodak Company in which Kodak
Division and case type: Milimani Commercial CourtsCivil Case
I have before me an application by the plaintiff expressed to be brought under the provisions of Order XXXIX Rules 1, 2, and 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules and Section 3A of the Civil Procedure Act for one primary order, save for costs, that “a temporary injunction do issue restraining the defendant whether by itself, its servants and/or employees from selling or offering for sale whether by public auction or private treaty, transferring, charging, leasing, pledging or in any other way alienati
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MOMBASA Civil Appeal 59 of 2006 JACKSON NZARO……………………………………………………….APPELLANT VERSUS KAVITA BHATT……………………………………………………….. RESPONDENT J U D G M E N T This is an appeal against the decision of the Principal Magistrate given on the 30th March 2006 allowing the Respondent’s applications dated 17th March 2006 and 15th March 2006 in Mombasa CMCC Numbers 817 of 2006 and 993 of 2006 respectively which had been consolidated.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAKURU Civil Appeal 30 of 1997 [Being an appeal from the Judgment of Honourable Japhet Mahasi – R.M in Resident Magistrate’s Court - Kabarnet, Land/Civil case Nos. 1 & 2 of 1992 dated the 24th March 1997] DANIEL KIPKEMEI CHEROGONY ...…...………….…...
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF KENYA AT NAIROBI Civil Appeal 263 of 2004 ABERDARE FREIGHT SERVICES LTD………………………....APPELLANT AND KENYA REVENUE AUTHORITY……………………………….RESPONDENT (Being an appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of Kenya at Nairobi ( Nyamu, J.) dated 9th November 2004 in MISC APPLICATION NO. 946 OF 2004) *************************** REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT On the 9th of June, 2005 we delivered our judgment in this appeal dismissing it and reserv
Division and case type: Milimani Commercial CourtsCivil Case
Plaintiffs case when she observed that the Plaintiffs had not shown a prima facie case that the orders sought in their plaint could be granted. On the basis of a letter by Kodak Company in which Kodak
Division and case type: Milimani Commercial CourtsCivil Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI Civil Case 373 of 2006 AFRICA ECO-CAMPS LTD. …………………………… PLAINTIFF VERSUS FIDELITY COMMERCIAL BANK LTD.
Division and case type: Milimani Commercial CourtsCivil Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI (MILIMANI COMMERCIAL COURTS) Civil Case 371 of 2003 ECON CONSTRUCTION AND ENGINEERING LIMITED………….PLAINTIFF VERSUS GIRO COMMERCIAL BANK LIMITED………...……………..1ST DEFENDANT WAITHAKA MWANGI………………………..…………..……..2ND DEFENDANT R U L I N G The 1st defendant has moved this court, by Notice of Motion dated 13th July 2005, brought under 0XXXIX Rule 4 of the Civil Procedure Rules and Section 3A of the Civil Procedure Act. The 1st defendant seeks an
Division and case type: Milimani Commercial CourtsCivil Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI COMMERCIAL DIVISION, MILIMANI Civil Case 1020 of 2002 ALUTA HOLDINGS LTD………………………..………………………PLAINTIFF VERSUS RAJ PARMAR……………………………………………………..…DEFENDANT RULING In this application (by chamber summons dated 7th October, 2005) the Defendant, RAJ PARMAR, seeks an order that the Plaintiff, ALUTA HOLDINGS LTD, do serve the Defendant particulars of the plaint as requested for in the request for particulars filed on 22nd July, 2005. The Defenda
Division and case type: CivilCivil Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT KAKAMEGA Civil Case 189 of 1989 BENJAMIN SIPITALI MUNGWANA ……..................PLAINTIFF (NOW DECEASED) VERSUS NORAH KHAOYA SHEM) JENIPHER ACHINGO MUNGWANA) ……...………….............………. DEFENDANT AND SHEM NALIANYA SIBITALI ………………………………............……...