Search court decisions

…On application by the plaintiff an interlocutory judgment was entered against the defendant and suit listed for formal proof.…

…We are not called upon to consider the operation of section 149, (nor of the application of prerogative orders mooted on the first appeal).…

…If any consequential order is needed application can be made to the senior resident magistrate. I would therefore dismiss the appeal with costs. Chesoni Ag JA.…

…I award costs of this application and costs of the suit to the Defendant. It is so ordered. Dated and delivered at Mombasa this 30th June 2003. A.G.A. ETYANG JUDGE…

…The main application may be relisted for hearing at an early date as there is a Certicate of Urgency. DATED THIS 19TH DAY OF APRIL, 1999. P. N. WAKI JUDGE…

…An application was made for an adjournment so that the defence could call him. The application was disallowed; so to that the failure to call him cannot be attributed to any deliberate withholding of a witness.…

…Order XXXVI rule 3D subrules (1) and (2) of the Civil Procedure Rules, provides: “3D 1 1) An application under section 38 of the Limitation of Actions Act shall be made by originating summons. 2 2) The summons shall be supported…

…At the hearing of the appellant’s application, his case was that in 1973 he purchased the suit land from the respondent.…

…From the evidence, these duties included supervision of plot allocation whereby the Plaintiff would sale application forms to prospective applicants who would fill the forms and return them to the Plaintiff.…

…The Plaintiff would then check the applications to see the requirements.…

…Muite for Mary submitted the application was misconceived and should be dismissed with costs because the issues were such that the litigation should be by suit. Mr.…

…This court did not although not expressly recognize and accept the concept of presumption of marriage in Mbiti, Mulu and Another v Miwa Mutunga, Civil Application No NAI 17 of 1983.…

…Application granted. Order: Further to the court’s order of 5.7.93, the owner of land 986 Eliud N. Gituto or his agent/servant be herein present in order to ascertain the boundary. Eliud N.…

…The Plaintiff’s Advocate opposed the application for adjournment and the Court agreed with her that because the Defendant’s Advocate had had ample opportunity to withdraw, he had not done so and was not entitled to an adjournment…

…By an application dated 1st May. 1990 and filed on 4th June, 1990, M/S.…

…As regards the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur, I must state at this stage that no attempt was made by the plaintiff to establish the basis of its application and in the circumstances of this case, I find it has no application…

…The appellant has by his petition of appeal challenged the learned trial judge’s application of principle to the evidence adduced before him and his assessment and award of damages at Kshs 10,000/=.…

…The application was opposed by the defendant.…

…I allowed that application but that addition still does not, in my view, change the situation. Coast Hauliers have at no time made claim on the defendant. They neither make any such claim in the plaint.…

…We would further agree that on application of the articles of the Warsaw Convention 1929 to the evidence adduced in this suit the appellant was not entitled to rely on its claim to limitation of liability to the respondents…

…The court granted the application by allowing the responding to plead and rely on the agreement made on March 27, 1980 for the purchase of 5.3 acres.…

…He did not however have a copy of the sale agreement, application form for the land control board consent or even the transfer. With that 1st defendant closed his case.…

…He did not also tender in evidence the application form for the land control board or even the transfer form from Nderi Gatimu to himself.…

…Trainor, J granted the application and imposed interim injunctions on the Defendants as from August 10, 1984 pending the inter partes hearing of the summons.…

…Gachuhi, J heard the Plaintiff’s application for injunction on July 30, 1984 and dismissed it. Whatever the reasons given, it was too late. The suit was never heard. But Mrs Russell fought on.…