Search court decisions

…He had heard the evidence of the Plaintiff and his doctor. The proceedings had proceeded ex parte and in the absence of the defendants. The Plaintiff closed his case and the suit was adjourned for Mr.…

…From the evidence before the court the plaintiff stated that he boarded the defendants lorry. Motor vehicle KWL 306 Souza Lorry, that was driven on the material day by the 2nd defendant.…

…With regard to absence of evidence of service of the order it is not disputed that no evidence to that effect is annexed to the affidavits in support of the motion.…

…There is no evidence at all of the person who served Mr Malakwen on 3rd November, 1993.…

…The issue of jurisdiction was decided, “on the evidence” before Golf, J.…

…It is immaterial whether the evidence is scanty or limited. Scanty or limited facts constitute the evidence before the court.…

…In Indian proceedings a Mrs Ingles had given evidence which supported the wife’s claim, and hence the pypothesis of the wife’s adultery.…

…Such evidence was given on commission and taken down by commissioner who signed the document.…

…When the learned judge reached the evidence of Mr. Njugi he said: “I must confess the evidence of Mr.…

…It was evidence which corroborated Mary Njoki’s evidence, in particular it established her connection with the deceased.…

…In this respect I would refer to ss.13 and 51 of the Evidence Act which read: 13.…

…For nearly eighteen (18) years hence, there is no evidence of any conjugal relationship between the deceased and the rst appellant. Indeed, since 1972 there was no evidence of such relationship.…

…Damages are clearly payable to the parents of a deceased child, irrespective of the age of the child and irrespective of whether there is or there is not evidence of pecuniary contribution. 3.…

…The award of shs 100,000/- was in any event excessive and not supported by any evidence of loss. We shall deal with ground one first.…

…The principles for the successful grant of a review are well settled and the two which are pertinent to this application are that some new and important matter or evidence which could not with diligence have been discovered…

…Why this authority could not have been discovered after the exercise of due diligence even if this authority could be regarded as “new and important matter or evidence”’ is not explained.…

…Reference was made to the three dates ie September 25, 26, and 27, 1976 whose evidence the judge bore in mind and which was not challenged by the plaintiff in his evidence.…

…The judge referred to the defendant’s evidence that the plaintiff stole from the defendant on September 18, 1976 and held that the evidence was not strictly admissible and added, “the court, therefore, disregards all evidence…

…Coupled with that there is the evidence of DW 1 to the effect that the plaintiff was seen by him leaving his farm on the material day and shortly before his arrest. That evidence stands uncontroverted.…

…That evidence is at great variance with what is contained in the P3 form. There are peculiar aspects about Dr Rouhani’s medical evidence.…

…be corroborated by other evidence of an independent nature implicating the defendant.…

…evidence requires corroboration as a matter of law by virtue of s.124 of the Evidence Act Chapter 80.…

…At the hearing before the learned Judge, evidence was given by Fredrick Gachoka Njoroge (plaintiff No. 4) and one Kinuthia Githuri on behalf of the plaintiffs whilst the defendant gave evidence and called one witness.…

…She is the one who gave evidence that the piece of land belonged to the father. The fourth plaintiff giving evidence stated as follows: “The issue of Mbugua being a younger son was put to Mzee Kinuthia.…

…I turn, therefore, to examine the plaint and the evidence in support of it.…

…The learned judge, however, did not decide this issue directly, (nor could he do so in view of the way in which the evidence had emerged); for he said “No evidence was tendered to show the saw operator was negligent as a…

…Having considered both the evidence of the plaintiff and the D.W. 1, I think, between the two, that of DW 1 is more credible.…

…As regards the defendant’s counter-claim, no evidence was led to show that the plaintiff was responsible for the breakage.…

…Evidence is not to be pleaded.…

…The previous driver who had the car since morning is unknown and as such did not give evidence. The evidence of the plaintiff has been corroborated by the two defence witness.…

…The plaintiff in addition to the affidavit evidence and evidence in the lower court called three witnesses while the defendant called 1 witness.…

…It was also his evidence that the plaintiffs vehicle was moving slowly. On the above evidence, who was to blame for the accident?…

…The plaintiff in addition to the affidavit evidence and evidence in the lower court called three witnesses while the defendant called 1 witness.…

…It was also his evidence that the plaintiffs vehicle was moving slowly. On the above evidence, who was to blame for the accident?…

…He denied the offence and said the evidence of PW1 was false. During cross-examination, he denied shouting that the deceased was a thief and repeated that the evidence of PW1 was false.…

…The prosecution case was dependent on the evidence of PW1.…

…He denied the offence and said the evidence of PW1 was false. During cross-examination, he denied shouting that the deceased was a thief and repeated that the evidence of PW1 was false.…

…The prosecution case was dependent on the evidence of PW1.…