Judgment[2019] KEELC 65
Janeffer Irumbi Nyagah v John Njoka Ngiri & another
Environment and Land Court at Embu
Case law
Search tips: "exact phrase" · -exclude · land | property · negligen* · citations like [2023] KEHC 123
Division and case type: Environment and LandLand Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MOMBASA CIVIL SUIT NO. 25 OF 2015 ABDULKARIM SALEH MUHSIN......................................................................PLAINTIFF VERSUS 1.
Division and case type: Constitutional and Human RightsConstitutional Petition
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MOMBASA CIVIL SUIT NO. 25 OF 2015 ABDULKARIM SALEH MUHSIN......................................................................PLAINTIFF VERSUS 1.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI (CORAM: OMOLO, TUNOI & LAKHA, JJ.A.) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 82 OF 1998 BETWEEN DAIMA BANK LIMITED ...............................1ST APPELLANT KANGETHE & COMPANY ...............................2ND APPELLANT WHITESTONE AUCTIONEERS (K) LIMITED ...............3RD APPELLANT AND K.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF KENYA PEAL AT NYERI Civil Appeal 251 of 1996 1. JOSEPHAT MWANGI…………….................................……………………….APPELLANTS AND RUTH W.
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 only apply to the court which made the order to set it aside.”. This court, in its more recent decision in the case of Michael Miana and K.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI CIVIL APPEAL NO. 38 OF 1995 PATRICK CAMPBELL MANYUIRA……….……..APPELLANT AND ANN MUTHONI PERTET…………………………….RESPONDENT (Appeal from an order of the High Court of Kenya at Nairobi (Mr.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
That evidence so far as it was adduced by the respondent fell foul of the requirements of rule 5 of Order 75: it failed to establish that the appellant was “the relevant “person”. The upshot of that is that the High Court did not have admiralty jurisdiction and the respondent was not entitled to invoke that jurisdiction.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT KISUMU (Coram: Platt, Apaloo JJA & Masime Ag JA) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 170 OF 1986 BETWEEN OKONG’O...........................................................................APPELLANT AND ATTORNEY-GENERAL & ANOTHER..............................RESPONDENT