Judgment[2023] KEHC 27214
Case law
Search tips: "exact phrase" · -exclude · land | property · negligen* · citations like [2023] KEHC 123
Division and case type: Environment and LandCivil Appeal
Ogolla v Onyango Otunga & Company Advocates (Civil Appeal E101 of 2023) [2023] KEHC 27214 (KLR) (27 December 2023) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2023] KEHC 27214 (KLR) REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT KISUMU CIVIL APPEAL E101 OF 2023 RE ABURILI, J DECEMBER 27, 2023 BETWEEN GEORGE OGOLLA .................................................................................. APPELLANT AND ONYANGO OTUNGA & COMPANY ADVOCATES ......................
Division and case type: Commercial and TaxCase number Winding Up Cause
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT KITALE WINDING UP CAUSE N0. 01 OF 2011 IN THE MATTER OF THE COMPANIES ACT CHAPTER 486 AND IN THE MATTER OF INTESTATE PETROLEUM COMPANY LIMITED AFRICA OIL TURKANA (K) LIMITED..................1ST PETITIONER AFRICAN OIL CORPORATION ..............................2ND PETITIONER AFRICAN OIL KENYA BV .......................................
Division and case type: Environment and LandLand Case
That this Honourable Court be pleased to revive this suit which abated by this Court's order on 2nd July, 2012. That this Honourable Court be pleased to retain the Inhibition Order lodged upon the suit land and to restrain the Defendant from wasting, cutting trees and/or vegetation or anything growing on the suit premises and from harassing the Applicant or the heirs or Dependants of the late Plaintiff until the determination of this suit.
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: Commercial and TaxInsolvency Cause
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI (CORAM: NYARANGI, MASIME & COCKAR JJ A) CIVIL APPEAL NO 111 OF 1990 PAUL JOSEPH NGEI …………………...…… APPELLANT VERSUS OFFICIAL RECEIVER……………..….……. RESPONDENT (Appeal from a Ruling and Order of the High Court at Nairobi (Akiwumi J) dated 14th June 1990 in High Court Bankruptcy Cause No 14 of 1988)
Division and case type: Commercial and TaxCase number Bankruptcy Cause
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI (NAIROBI LAW COURTS) Bankruptcy Cause 5 of 1989 Wandiema ...................................................................................................... APPLICANT VERSUS Barclays Bank of Kenya Ltd ..............................................................
Division and case type: Commercial and TaxCivil Appeal
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI (NAIROBI LAW COURTS) Bankruptcy Cause 14 of 1988 IN THE MATTER OF BANKRUPTCY ACT ……...............................…………….PLAINTIFF Versus IN THE MATTER OF HON. PAUL JOSEPH NGEI…….........................……..DEFENDANT RULING The official receiver has applied to the court under S.17 of the Bankruptcy Act (Cap 53) (hereinafter called the Act) and r.151 of the bankruptcy rules (hereinafter called the Rules) for an order appointing a date to ho
Division and case type: Commercial and TaxCase number Winding Up Cause
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI (NAIROBI LAW COURTS) WINDING UP CAUSE 43 OF 1988 IN THE MATTER OF MAGNUM INTERNATIONAL LTD AND IN THE MATTER OF THE COMPANIES ACT (CAP. Mr Khaminwa has applied under Section 228 of the Companies Act (hereinafter called the Act) that notwithstanding that Magnum International Limited (hereinafter called the Company) had been ordered to be wound up by an order of the Court made on 26th June, 1989, the Company may be at liberty to commence p