Case law
Search tips: "exact phrase" · -exclude · land | property · negligen* · citations like [2023] KEHC 123
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Appeal
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI (CORAM: GITHINJI, MWILU & ODEK, JJ.A) CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 54 OF 2015 BETWEEN ABDI YUSUF MAALIM …………………………………………………………………….APPELLANT AND REPUBLIC …………………………………………………………………………..……… RESPONDENT (An appeal from the judgment of the High Court of Kenya at Nairobi, (Justice Muchemi) dated 19th December, 2013 in H.
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Appeal
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI ( Coram: Gachuhi, Cockar & Muli JJ A ) CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1 OF 1993 BETWEEN DANIEL WACHIRA MUNENE.........................................................APPELLANT AND REPUBLIC.....................................................................................RESPONDENT (Appeal from a judgment of the High Court of Kenya at Nairobi (Mr Justice JA Mango) dated 23rd December 1992, in Criminal Case No 7 of 1992) ***********************************
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Appeal
Ekaita v Republic (Criminal Appeal 25 of 1994) [1994] KECA 107 (KLR) (23 June 1994) (Judgment) Nebart Ekaita v Republic [1994] eKLR Neutral citation: [1994] KECA 107 (KLR) REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT KISUMU CRIMINAL APPEAL 25 OF 1994 JM GACHUHI, JE GICHERU & RSC OMOLO, JJA JUNE 23, 1994 BETWEEN NEBART EKAITA .................................................................................... APPELLANT AND REPUBLIC ..................................................................
Division and case type: CriminalCase number Criminal Application
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI ( Coram: Cockar, Omolo, Tunoi JJ A ) CRIMINAL APPLICATION NAI. 4 OF 1994 BETWEEN REPUBLIC.................................................................................APPLICANT AND 1.
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Appeal
REPUBLIC OF KENYA Nzuki v Republic High Court, at Mombasa May 11, 1992 Wambilyangah J Criminal Appeal No. 7 of 1992 May 11, 1992, Wambilyanga J delivered the following Judgment.
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Appeal
unreasonable to hold that the mere possession of the pistol on this date is sufficient to found a conclusion that the appellant participated in the robbery. Neither the trial magistrate nor the High Court pinpointed the evidence they considered cogent enough to justify the conclusion that the 1st appellant participated in the robbery.