We use strictly necessary cookies to run the site. With your consent we also use performance cookies to understand how the site is used. Read the cookie policy.
Case law
Search court decisions
47,624 judgments, rulings and orders · latest 21 September 2026
Search tips:"exact phrase" · -exclude · land | property · negligen* · citations like [2023] KEHC 123
High Court at NairobiCase number Miscellaneous Application E167 of 2025
Division and case type: Civil·Miscellaneous Application
Any party to a reference aggrieved by any determination or order of a Tribunal made therein may, within thirty days after the date of such determination or order, appeal to the Environment and Land Court: Provided that the Environment and Land Court may, where it is satised that there is sucient reason for so doing, extend the said period of thirty days upon such conditions, if any, as it may think t. (2) In hearing appeals under subsection (1) of this section the Court shall have all the pow
High Court at MalindiCase number Miscellaneous Civil Application E13 of 2020
Division and case type: Civil·Miscellaneous Civil Application
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MALINDI MISC. E13 OF 2020 ATLANTIS KENYA LIMITED......APPLICANT VERSUS CHEBUSWA LIMITED...............RESPONDENT Coram: Hon.
High Court at NairobiCase number Miscellaneous Civil Application 011 of 2019
Division and case type: Milimani Commercial Courts·Miscellaneous Civil Application
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MOMBASA CIVIL SUIT NO. 25 OF 2015 ABDULKARIM SALEH MUHSIN......................................................................PLAINTIFF VERSUS 1.
High Court at NairobiCase number Civil Case 27 of 2012
Division and case type: Milimani Commercial Courts·Civil Case
which was advanced to the Plaintiff by the Defendant. The principal prayer therein was an order directing the Defendant to register a discharge of charge at the lands office in favour of the Plaintiff and to forthwith release the original title document over Nairobi/Block III/601 – Komarock to the Plaintiff.
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT EMBU SUCCESSION CAUSE NO. 47 OF 2011 In the matter of the Estate of MZEE OMARI (Deceased) ABDALLA MUTEMBEI GISAGA.................................APPLICANT VERSUS PAMELA GACHERI PATRISIO.........................1ST RESPONDENT CRISUS MICHENI NDEKE (MWALIMU)..........2ND RESPONDENT NYAGA ISMAEL (SMATEX)............................3RD RESPONDENT JOSEPH MURITHI (MUEMBU).......................4TH RESPONDENT NJAGI NTIBA (CHIBU)...........................
Division and case type: Civil·Miscellaneous Application
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT EMBU SUCCESSION CAUSE NO. 47 OF 2011 In the matter of the Estate of MZEE OMARI (Deceased) ABDALLA MUTEMBEI GISAGA.................................APPLICANT VERSUS PAMELA GACHERI PATRISIO.........................1ST RESPONDENT CRISUS MICHENI NDEKE (MWALIMU)..........2ND RESPONDENT NYAGA ISMAEL (SMATEX)............................3RD RESPONDENT JOSEPH MURITHI (MUEMBU).......................4TH RESPONDENT NJAGI NTIBA (CHIBU)...........................
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT EMBU CIVIL CASE NO. 82 OF 2012 (FORMERLY NYERI HCCC 308/1997) FREDRICK MUKUA NJIGORU……............…..........1ST PLAINTIFF KUDGETA WAMUGO NJIGORU................................2ND PLAINTIFF VERSUS LIQUIDATOR KENYA NATIONAL ASSUARANCE BANK LTD.......1ST DEFENDANT KENYA COMMERCIAL BANK LTD.....
Division and case type: Milimani Commercial Courts·Election Petition
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI ELECTION PETITION NO. 20 OF 2008 IN THE MATTER OF : THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY AND PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS ACT (CHAPTER 7, LAWS OF KENYA) AND THE REGULATIONS MADE THEREUNDER AND IN THE MATTER OF: ELECTION FOR THE KANDARA PARLIAMENTARY CONSTITUENCY AND IN THE MATTER OF: THE PETITION OF ALICE MUTHONI WAHOME BETWEEN ALICE MUTHONI WAHOME ………….…..........…………PETITIONER VERSUS JAMES MAINA KAMAU …..……….….……...……..1ST RESPONDENT REUBEN WARUI CHEGE ………
Division and case type: Milimani Commercial Courts·Civil Case
(d) It is just in the circumstances of this case and in the interests of justice that the restraining orders be granted. Opposing the application, the 1st Defendant filed grounds of opposition on 9th July, 2010 which were supplemented by the 1st Defendant’s replying affidavit sworn by Jon Waïn, the 1st Defendant’s Legal Counsel on 15th July, 2010.
Division and case type: Civil·Miscellaneous Civil Application
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MALINDI MATRIMONIAL CAUSE NO. 14 OF 2008 C.A.M……………………………......................…PLAINTIFF -VERSUSW.T.C…………………………..………………....DEFENDANT RULING C.M.A (the petitioner) has filed this cause against W.T.C (the respondent) in which she petitions for the dissolution of the marriage between her and the respondent.
High Court at NairobiCase number Civil Case 310 of 2007
Division and case type: Milimani Commercial Courts·Civil Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI (MILIMANI COMMERCIAL COURTS COMMERCIAL AND TAX DIVISION) CIVIL CASE NO. 310 OF 2007 ANTHONY MAINA NJIIRI (suing as attorney for JAMES NJIIRI)…….………..…………………….................
Division and case type: Milimani Commercial Courts·Civil Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI (MILIMANI COMMERCIAL COURTS COMMERCIAL AND TAX DIVISION) CIVIL CASE NO. 310 OF 2007 ANTHONY MAINA NJIIRI (suing as attorney for JAMES NJIIRI)…….………..…………………….................
High Court at NairobiCase number Civil Case 731 of 2003
Division and case type: Milimani Commercial Courts·Civil 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 Courts·Civil 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: Civil·Case number Civil Application
REPUBLIC OF KENYA COURT OF APPEAL IN KENYA AT NAIROBI CIVIL APPLICATION 323 OF 2009 CFC FINANCIAL SERVICES LIMITED................................APPLICANT AND JUJA ROAD FANCY STORE LIMITED............................RESPONDENT (An application for extension of time within which to lodge the record of appeal from the ruling and order of the High Court of Kenya at Nairobi (Hon. Lady Justice Khaminwa) dated 6th February 2009 in H.C.C.C.
High Court at NairobiCase number Civil Case 616 of 2009
Division and case type: Milimani Commercial Courts·Civil 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: Civil·Miscellaneous Application
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF KENYA AT NAIROBI CRIMINAL APPEAL 36 OF 2008 ADBULHAKIM MOHAMED HASSAN HUSSEIN..............APPELLANT AND REPUBLIC................................................................RESPONDENT (Appeal from a conviction and sentence of the High Court of Kenya at Nairobi (Ombija, J.) dated 26th March, 2008 in H.C.Cr. 196 of 2003) ***************** JUDGMENT OF THE COURT Abdulhakim Mohamed Hassan Hussein, the appellant herein was arraigned in the superior c
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: Milimani Commercial Courts·Civil 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.