Judgment[1987] KECA 43
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: NYARANGI, GACHUHI & APALOO JJA) CRIMINAL APPEAL NO 22 OF 1987 MWANGI …………………….APPELLANTS VERSUS REPUBLIC…………….……RESPONDENT
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Appeal
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI (CORAM: NYARANGI, GACHUHI & APALOO JJA) CRIMINAL APPEAL NO 139 OF 1986 NJAU …………………….APPELLANTS VERSUS REPUBLIC…………….……RESPONDENT
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI CIVIL APPEAL NO. 31 OF 1987 VIRGINIA EDITH WAMBUI OTIENO..…….………APPLICANT VERSUS JOASH OUGO & ANOTHER………….…......…RESPONDENT RULING.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
I agree with the judgment of Nyarangi JA. The appeal will be allowed with the orders proposed by him.
Division and case type: CivilMiscellaneous Application
Esso Standard Kenya Ltd v Onesmus Kihara Mwangi Court of Appeal, at Nairobi June 5, 1985 Hancox JA, Platt & Gachuhi Ag JJA Civil Application No NAI 29 of 1984 (Application from the High Court at Nairobi, Nyarangi J) Appeal – delay in filing–– letter to Registrar requesting for precedings not copied to respondent – Rule 81 (2) Court of Appeal Rules. Nyarangi J as he then was on July 18, 1980 gave judgment in favour of the Esso Standard Kenya (no plaintiff) the defendant filed notice of appeal o
Division and case type: CivilCivil Suit
Esso Standard Kenya Ltd v Onesmus Kihara Mwangi Court of Appeal, at Nairobi June 5, 1985 Hancox JA, Platt & Gachuhi Ag JJA Civil Application No NAI 29 of 1984 (Application from the High Court at Nairobi, Nyarangi J) Appeal – delay in filing–– letter to Registrar requesting for precedings not copied to respondent – Rule 81 (2) Court of Appeal Rules. Nyarangi J as he then was on July 18, 1980 gave judgment in favour of the Esso Standard Kenya (no plaintiff) the defendant filed notice of appeal o
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Appeal
Parliament until 1979, when he lost his seat; who would pay them Kshs 36,000 for carrying out that order which was described as ‘the work’. If the prosecution case was accepted there could be no question but that Charles and the second appellant were to be armed with guns when they went to arrest Tenai.