Judgment[2014] KEIC 9
Case law
Search tips: "exact phrase" · -exclude · land | property · negligen* · citations like [2023] KEHC 123
Division and case type: GeneralUnclassified
Moses Kiprotich Rutto & Others v Telkom Kenya Limited (Cause 139 (N) of 2009) [2014] KEIC 9 (KLR) (Employment and Labour) (22 December 2014) (Ruling) Moses Kiprotich Rutto & Others v Telkom Kenya Limited [2014] eKLR Neutral citation: [2014] KEIC 9 (KLR) REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE INDUSTRIAL COURT AT NAIROBI EMPLOYMENT AND LABOUR CAUSE 139 (N) OF 2009 NZIOKI WA MAKAU, J DECEMBER 22, 2014 REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE INDUSTRIAL COURT AT NAIROBI EMPLOYMENT AND LABOUR CAUSE 139 (N) OF 2009 NZIOKI WA MAKAU
Division and case type: Milimani Commercial CourtsCivil Suit
conduct of the defendant’s representatives could not excuse the failure to comply with the unless order the pleading had property been struck out.” The general principle is that orders of the court must be obeyed and a litigant who deliberately and without proper excuse disobeys such an order is not allowed to proceed. Singh Gitau for the Respondent did not come to court to argue his client’s position.
Division and case type: Milimani Commercial CourtsUnclassified
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI (MILIMANI COMMERCIAL COURTS) Misc Appli 1670 of 2007 ABID ALI HASHIM……...………..……………….APPLICANT VERSUS ANTONY KIHONGE MUHIA …..……………RESPONDENT RULING Before me is a notice of motion filed pursuant to Section 18 (1)(b) of the Civil Procedure Act. The applicant seek an order of the court to transfer Nairobi CMCCC No.
Division and case type: Environment and LandCivil Suit
The litigants argument is found at page 5 of the ruling 2nd paragraph line 10 from the bottom: “that order vii rule 1(2) Civil Procedure Rules is silent as to whether each plaintiff should file a verifying affidavit, that there is no need for filing affidavit by each plaintiff as what is to be verified is the correctness of the averments and not their truthfulness, that the truthfulness of the claim is a matter for the trial, that the verifying affidavit of the first respondent is sufficient
Division and case type: Milimani Commercial CourtsCivil Suit
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI (MILIMANI COMMERCIAL COURTS) Civil Suit 379 of 2004 ANTHONY AMBAKA KEGODE ……….............................……………..1ST PLAINTIFF UHAI LIMITED………………………….............................………………2ND PLAINTIFF VERSUS FOUR NINETY INVESTMENT LIMITED…….............................…..1ST DEFENDANT ADAM GRAIG OGDEN …………..……………..........................……2ND DEFENDANT EAST AFRICAN SAFARI AIR LIMITED………..........................….3RD DEFENDANT EAST AFRICAN
Division and case type: CivilCivil Suit
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT NAIROBI MILIMANI LAW COURTS Civil Suit 1175 of 2005 ADAM THUMI…………………………………………………………….. PLAINTIFF VERSUS MAINA KIRIRO………………………………………...……………… DEFENDANT RULING This Ruling is made in the Chamber Summons application dated 22nd September 2005 brought under Order XXXIX Rules 1, 2 and 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules and Section 3A of the Civil Procedure Act.
Division and case type: COMMERCIAL DIVISIONCivil Suit
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA COMMERCIAL DIVISION, MILIMANI CIVIL SUIT NO 1421 OF 2000 BILSON STEPHEN MUTUKU ……………….…………………..……...PLAINTIFF VERSUS KENYA COMMERCIAL BANK…………………………..……...1ST DEFENDANT DILIGENT AUCTIONEERS LTD ………………..…………….....2ND DEFENDANT SAMMY GICHUKI WAIGWA ……………………...………..……3RD DEFENDANT R U L I N G The 3rd defendant’s chamber summons dated 14th May 2004 is brought under Order 16 Rule 5 (a) of the Civil Procedure Rules. The defendant seeks an order for the di
Division and case type: GeneralUnclassified
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI ADOPTION CAUSE NO. 89 OF 2003 IN THE MATTER OF THE CHILDREN ACT 2001 SECTION 162 BABY DK (AN INFANT) RULING This is an application for international adoption.
Division and case type: GeneralUnclassified
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI DIVORCE CAUSE NO. 4 OF 2002 A.W.H ……………………….
Division and case type: GeneralUnclassified
REPUBLIC OF KENYA NIMA INVESTMENTS LIMITED ..............................APPLICANT AND STEPHEN MBUKI KIMANI ..................................RESPONDENT R U L I N G Having heard advocates for both parties and in all the circumstances of the case, I am satisfied that this is a proper case to exercise my discretion and grant the extension sought. Accordingly, I order that Notice of Appeal be filed within 7 days from today and the Record of Appeal within 21 days thereafter.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Suit
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI CIVIL SUIT NO. 1424 OF 1997 BENROSE FAST FOOD………...……..…………………………………..PLAINTIFF -VERSUSMURANGA PROPERTIES LTD……....….…………………………..DEFENDANT RULING In this application which is by Chamber Summons the applicant is asking for the Orders prayed in the application.
Division and case type: GeneralUnclassified
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI CORAM: (GICHERU, OMOLO & SHAH JJ.A) CIVIL APPLICATION NO. NAI249 OF 2000 (117/2000 UR) BETWEEN Hurlingham Hospital Management Ltd ....................
Division and case type: CivilCivil Suit
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI CIVIL SUIT NO. 3257 OF 1978 ERIC PETER WANJAU .................................................PLAINTIFF AND GEORGE MUNDET ....................................................DEFENDANT R U L I N G On 26th of March, 1993 this court entered a judgment pursuant to an Award filed and read in court on 2nd December, 1992, in the presence of Mr.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Suit
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI (MILIMANI LAW COURTS) CIVIL SUIT 1293 OF 93 BARNABAS EMBUKHANE & 9 OTHERS.…………PLAINTIFF -VERSUSGENERAL PLASTICS LIMITED.…………………….DEFENDANT
Division and case type: GeneralUnclassified
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI (CORAM: GICHERU, KWACH & TUNOI, JJ.A.) CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 260 OF 1999 BETWEEN JOEL MUTHUI KYAMBU .................................
Division and case type: GeneralUnclassified
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE COURTSOF APPEAL AT NAIROBI civil misc appl 211 of 98 MACHARIA KARUGU I ......................................APPLICANT AND CHEGE MACHARIA .........................................RESPONDENT (Application for extension of time to file Notice and Record of Appeal from the Judgment of the High Court of Kenya at Nairobi (Justice Githinji) dated 13th October, 1997 in H.C.C.C. 379 OF 1986) ************* R U L I N G This is an application under rule 4 of the Rules of this Court
Division and case type: GeneralUnclassified
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI (CORAM: LAKHA, J.A. (IN CHAMBERS)) CIVIL APPLICATION NO.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Suit
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI MILIMANI LAW COURTS CIVIL SUIT NO. 1267 OF 1999 DISHON GOGO & 6 OTHERS .............................PLAINTIFF VERSUS BRIGADIER JOHN SEREM & 10 OTHERS ...................DEFENDANTS R U L I N G Before this Court is Amended Chamber Summons brought under Order XXI Rule 22.
Division and case type: GeneralUnclassified
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI (GICHERU, TUNOI & LAKHA, JJ.A.) CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 87 1999 (32/99 UR) BETWEEN THE REPUBLIC .......................................
Division and case type: CivilCivil Suit
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI MILIMANI LAW COURTS CIVIL SUIT NO. 2234 OF 1993 IDRIS KIBIRANGA ........................................................