Judgment[2009] KEHC 11
Case law
Search tips: "exact phrase" · -exclude · land | property · negligen* · citations like [2023] KEHC 123
Division and case type: Constitutional and Human RightsPetition
Gikandi argues that he is able to show that it is jurisdictionally possible for conservatory orders to be granted despite the envisaged time-lines in Section 32 of the Act.This is the very subject of his application. In view of the restricted time in Section 32, the application by the Petitioners is made even more urgent.Once more urgent a person alleges contravention of his fundamental rights and freedoms under Section 70 – 83 of the Constitution this court as a Constitutional court must stop i
Division and case type: Constitutional and Human RightsElection Petition
Appeal went to great lengths to examine the relevant authorities and I totally agree with their conclusion on that issue. However in this case in considering the legal effect of the Act and the rules and particularly sections 14 (1) (a) and 14 (2) the provisions of the Interpretation and General Provisions Act (cap 2) set out namely section 24 and section 33 were not considered.
Division and case type: Constitutional and Human RightsPetition
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MOMBASA DIVORCE CAUSE NO.9 “A” OF 1996 A M ………………………………………………… PLAINTIFF - versus – Y J M …………………………………………… DEFENDANT J U D G E M E N T The Petitioner A M is a Swiss national who on 31-1-92 married the Respondent a Kenyan citizen in Switzerland. Immediately after their marriage the two came to Kenya and cohabited together at Diani in South Coast of Mombasa.