Judgment[1984] KECA 76
CLEOPHAS MASINDE SIMIYU & another v MAURICE BARASA WATAMBAMALA & 3 others
Court of Appeal at Nairobi
Case law
Search tips: "exact phrase" · -exclude · land | property · negligen* · citations like [2023] KEHC 123
Division and case type: CivilMiscellaneous Application
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI (Coram: Hancox, J A (In Chambers) CIVIL APPLICATION NO NAI 40 OF 1983 (In the matter of an intended appeal) BETWEEN 1. CLEOPHAS MASINDE SIMIYU……..………………………...APPLICANTS 2.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
What, today, is the correct approach of a court to an application for summary judgment under order XXXV rule 1 where there is a claim on a note and the defence is a set-off or counterclaim? Should the payment due on it be held up until the trial of the set-off or counterclaim has been heard?
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
ORDER Mr Khanna, for the appellants, by a motion on notice of February 2, 1984, expressed to be brought under rules 42 and 96 of the Court of Appeal Rules, asks this court to substitute as a party to the appeal in place of the late second appellant, Ajit Gurbaksh Singh, either Harbans Kaur, the widow, or one or both of the named executors of the deceased’s will who are Amrik Singh Gurbaksh Singh and Joginder Singh Gurbaksh Singh, the third and fifth appellants, and the hearing of the appeal
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT MALINDI CIVIL APPEAL 12 OF 83 MUTUKU AND ASSOCIATES…………..………………………….APPELLANT AND FELIX R M KITONGA & BROS LTD…………………………………RESPONDENT (From the ruling of the High Court of Kenya at Mombasa (Schofield, J) dated 16th December, 1982) Civil Suit No 65 & 513 of 1978 (Consolidated) _______________ RULING OF THE COURT HANCOX, J A It has been held, repeatedly, by this court that failure to include the formally drawn up decree or order embodying the decision of the court
Division and case type: CivilCivil Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI MILIMANI LAW COURTS CIVIL CASE NO 1150 OF 1983 PETER NJENGA……………………………………………………………....PAINTIFF VERSUS JAMES FINLAY (E A) HOLDINGS LTD………………………….................1ST DEFENDANT ENDESHA LTD……………………………………………………................2ND DEFENDANT RULING The plaintiff/applicant moved the court by way of Chamber Summons dated 2nd September 1983 for orders that the defendant’s herein be restrained from borrowing further sums of money using a security
Division and case type: CivilCivil Case
seeking inter alia an order vacating the caution, and on an interlocutory motion obtained an order vacating the caution. On appeal the Court of Appeal held that the court had power on motion under s 82(1) of the Land Registration Act 1925 to order that a caution be vacated when it was shown that the caution ought not to have been made.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI CIVIL CASE NO 3636 OF 1981 ALFRED MUHUHO………………………………………………………...................PLAINTIFF AND PIUS MWANGI WANGEREKA………………………………………….....................DEFENDANT
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
There is an air of ellipsis about Mr Chakava’s argument. It springs no doubt from the terms of the order drawn up as a result of the High Court’s judgment.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI (Coram: Madan, Kneller JJA & Chesoni Ag JA ) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 43 OF 1983 THE EAST AFRICAN POWER AND LIGHTING COMPANY LIMITED …..….....…................…..
Division and case type: CivilCivil Suit
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI (Coram: Madan, Kneller, JJ A and Nyarangi, Ag J A) BETWEEN SHELMITH GATHIGIA HENRY ……….……………….. APPELLANT AND WACHIRA RUCATHI ……………….………..……… RESPONDENT (Appeal from a Judgment and order of the High Court of Kenya at Nyeri (O’Kubasu, J) dated September 23rd, 1982 In Civil Suit 294 of 1979) JUDGMENT OF THE COURT KNELLER, J A Shelmith Gathigia Henry (Gathigia), the appellant, wants a decision of the High Court in Nyeri (O’Kubasu J) of September
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
without leave, it would have been incompetent in any event. The real issue before us is whether the order should have included a statement that leave to appeal had been given.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI (Coram: Hancox JA, Chesoni & Platt Ag JJA) CIVIL APPEAL NO 34 OF 1982 KEMFRO AFRICA LIMITED T/A “MERU EXPRESS SERVICES (1976)” & ANOTHER …………….…..…………….APPLICANT VERSUS OLIVE LUBIA & ANOTHER ………….....…..RESPONDENT RULING When this appeal was called on for hearing, Mr Kwach, appearing on behalf of the two respondents, took the preliminary objection that the mandatory provisions of Rule 85 (1) (f) of rules of this court had not been complied with, in that none o
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAKURU (CORAM: MADAN, KNELLER JJA & CHESONI AG JA) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5 OF 1983 BHANDARI CONSTRUCTION COMPANY …………………… APPELLANT VERSUS STANDARD JOINERY & BUILDING COMPANY…….…….… RESPONDENT
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
Lucie-Smith Ag CJ held that the former Supreme Court had inherent power ex debito justitiae to order stay of execution pending an appeal in Olivia Da Ritta Sequeira E Facho & Another v ER Sequeira, BA Roderigues and RA Ribeiro (1933) 15 KLR 34 (k) and Newbold P Sir Clement de Lestang Ag VP and Spry JA of the Court of Appeal for Eastern Africa in Ujagar Singh v Runda Coffee Estates Ltd [1966] EA 263 (CA-K). There was no appeal pending here but it may be that there could be other circumstances cal
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
REPUBLIC OF KENYA COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI civ app 13 of 80 M’Ikiara M’Mukanya and another v Gilbert Kabere M’Mbijiwe (Potter & Kneller JJA & Chesoni Ag JA) Civil Appeal No 13 of 1980 Cases 1. Thompson v Ward [1955] 2 QB 155 2.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
Consequently, the respondent asked for judgment against the appellant in the form of an eviction order and the costs, and interest on the costs, for having to bring this into court. The appellant claims that the same land was registered in the name of Mukui Kamau who allowed the appellant entry upon it in 1964 (which is twelve years before the respondent says the appellant trespassed on this land) and the appellant goes on to say that he has lived on it ever since, put up a house on it and plant
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAKURU (Coram: Madan and Kneller, JJ A and Chesoni, Ag. 32 OF 1982) civ app 32 of 82 BETWEEN ANDREW A APIYO ………………………..…………… APPELLANT AND MICHAEL M O MASHERE …………………………… RESPONDENT (Appeal from the Ruling of the High Court of Kenya at Eldoret (Mbaya, J) dated 7th May, 1982 in Civil Case No.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Suit
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT KISUMU (Coram: Law, J.A. Kneller and Hancos, Ag, JJ.A.) CIVIL APPEAL NO.