Judgment[1993] KECA 84
Case law
Search tips: "exact phrase" · -exclude · land | property · negligen* · citations like [2023] KEHC 123
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI (Coram: Gicheru, Muli & Tunoi JJ A) CIVIL APPEAL NO 33 OF 1993 GATEWAY INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED ….....….….APPELLANT VERSUS PAUL KAMAU WAITHAKA …….……………….………RESPONDENT (Appeal from the Ruling and Decree of the High Court of Kenya at Nairobi of the Honourable Mr Justice Tank dated 29th April, 1992 in High Court Civil Case No 670 of 1992)
Division and case type: Anti-CorruptionCivil Appeal
company and that the respondents would hold the Deed Plan, when released, to the Order of the Acceptances. As this letter is also relevant in the negotiations, I reproduce it’s contents hereunder:- “East African Acceptances Ltd Stanbank House Nairobi Dear Sirs, Galot Industries Ltd Purchase of LR Nos 1337 and 1338/2.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
This is one of the exceptions to the general rule that a party against whom an ex parte order has been made, can apply to the Court which made the order to set it aside. The Court of Appeal in England in the case of Cozens v North Devon Hospital Management Committee [1966] 2 All ER 799, held that althought it was a general principle in regard to ex parte orders that the party affected by the order could apply for it to be discharged, yet it would be contrary to the intention of the Limitatio