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.
Court decisions & case law | Wakili Link
Case law
Search court decisions
2,883 judgments, rulings and orders · latest 2 June 2026
Search tips:"exact phrase" · -exclude · land | property · negligen* · citations like [2023] KEHC 123
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.
decision of Lakha, J.A., a learned single judge of this Court, to seek to vary, discharge or reverse his order by the Court under the provisions of rule 54 (2) of the Rules. Oraro has submitted that the respondent having not chosen any of those options he cannot now challenge the consent order which he has not attempted to have set aside.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI (CORAM: OMOLO, SHAH & PALL, JJ.A.) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 292 OF 1997 BETWEEN SAMUEL NGURE GATHII.......................................APPELLANT AND JOSEPHINE WANJIRU MBUGUA................................RESPONDENT (Being an appeal from the judgment of the High Court of Kenya at Nairobi (Hon.
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI (CORAM: TUNOI, SHAH & PALL, JJ.A.) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 75 OF 1997 BETWEEN KENYA CEMENT MARKETING LIMITED............................................APPELLANT AND JAMES G.K.
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF KENYA AT NAIROBI Civil Appeal 112 of 1995 GERALD MBALE MWEA ……………................................................ …………………………..APPELLANT AND KARIKO KIHARA GICHOMO KIHARA ……………………........................................…………………….
Court of Appeal at NairobiJUDGE APPEAL,JusticeCase number Civil Appeal 182 of 1994
Division and case type: Civil·Civil Appeal
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI CIVIL APPEAL NO. 182 OF 1994 MACHAKOS DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE UNION LIMITED……….........APPELLANT AND PHILIP NZUKI KIILU…………………....................................................RESPONDENT (Appeal from a judgment of the High Court of Kenya at Machakos (Honourable Mr.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI CORAM: GICHERU, AKIWUMI & SHAH, JJ.A.) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 15 OF 1992 KENYA BUS SERVICES lIMITED...........................................................APPELLANT AND SUSAN MUTETI...................................................................................RESPONDENT (Appeal from the Ruling of the High Court of Kenya at Nairobi (Mr.
Court of Appeal at NairobiJUDGE APPEAL,JusticeCase number Civil Appeal 59 of 1991
Division and case type: Civil·Civil Appeal
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI (CORAM: GICHERU, TUNOI & LAKHA, JJ.A) CIVIL APPEAL NO. AGGARWAL Suing in his capacity as executor of Late Lekraj Aggarwal..................................................APPELLANT AND MUNSHIRAM & COMPANY LIMITED....................RESPONDENT (Appeal from the Judgment of the High Court of Kenya at Nairobi (Mr.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI (Coram:A.B. SHAH) CIVIL APPEAL 149 OF 1991 BETWEEN JOSEPHOCHIENG PHILIPKAFUANDE HENRY HEGGA (Trading as AQUILINE AGENCIES)…....................APPELLANTS VERSUS FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF CHICAGO.................
Court of Appeal at NairobiJustice,JUDGE APPEALCase number Civil Appeal 55 of 1986
Division and case type: Civil·Civil Appeal
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI ( Coram: Gachuhi,Cockar & Omolo JJ A ) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 55 OF 1986 BETWEEN NGORORO...............................................................................APPELLANT AND NDUTHA & ANOTHER.....................................................RESPONDENTS (Appeal from the ruling of the High Court of Kenya at Nairobi of the Chief Justice the Honourable Mr Justice Simpson delivered on 9th August, 1985) in HCCC No 3350 of 1984) *********************************
High Court at MombasaInsteadCase number Civil Case 649 of 1991
Division and case type: Civil·Civil Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MOMBASA CIVIL CASE NO 649 OF 1991 AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION...........................................PLAINTIFF VERSUS CONTAINER FREIGHTERS CO LTD................................RESPONDENT RULING This application for summary judgment is brought by way of a notice of motion under order 35 rules 1, 2 and 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules. It seeks an order that summary judgment be entered for the plaintiff, Agricultural Development Corporat
Court of Appeal at NairobiJUDGE APPEAL,HeCase number Civil Appeal 38 of 1986
Division and case type: Civil·Civil Appeal
power to make nor was there any appeal from the order for possession for reconstruction. The time to consider whether there was to be a true reconstruction was when the Tribunal made its order of February 9, 1976.
High Court at NairobiHeCase number Civil Case 1271 of 1979
Division and case type: Civil·Civil Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYAAT NAIROBI CIVIL CASE No. 1271 OF 1979 SYAN..................................................................APPELLANT VERSUS SUNSET HOTEL LTD...................................RESPONDENT
High Court at MombasaHis,AllCase number Civil Case 1034 of 1983
Division and case type: Civil·Civil Case
Ngeyma v Akamba Public Service High Court, at Mombasa February 8, 1985 Mandari J Civil Case No 1034 of 1983 Cases Benham Carter v Hyde Park Hotel Ltd [1948] 64 TLR 177 Firozali Noormchmed Haji v Elias Kapomba Toka C A 46/80 (unreported) Reckless V P C Allday & Co Ltd & another, 9 – 018. Advocates Anjarwalla for plaintiff Juma for defendants February 8, 1985, Mandari J delivered the following Judgment.
High Court at MombasaHis,AllCivil Case No 1034 of 1983
Division and case type: Civil·Civil Case
Ngeyma v Akamba Public Service High Court, at Mombasa February 8, 1985 Mandari J Civil Case No 1034 of 1983 Cases Benham Carter v Hyde Park Hotel Ltd [1948] 64 TLR 177 Firozali Noormchmed Haji v Elias Kapomba Toka C A 46/80 (unreported) Reckless V P C Allday & Co Ltd & another, 9 – 018. Advocates Anjarwalla for plaintiff Juma for defendants February 8, 1985, Mandari J delivered the following Judgment.
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?