Judgment[2019] KEHC 486
Case law
Search tips: "exact phrase" · -exclude · land | property · negligen* · citations like [2023] KEHC 123
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 OF KENYA AT NAIROBI Civil Appeal 162 of 1999 ADMINISTRATORS OF THE ESTATE OF MAXWELL MAURICE OMBOGO (DECEASED) .........................................................APPELLANT AND STANDARD CHARTERED BANK KENYA LTD........1ST RESPONDENT LAW SOCIETY OF KENYA........................................ 2ND RESPONDENT (Appeal from the Ruling and Order of the High Court of Kenya at Nairobi - Mr Justice A.I.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF KENYA AT NAIROBI Civil Appeal 162 of 1999 ADMINISTRATORS OF THE ESTATE OF MAXWELL MAURICE OMBOGO (DECEASED) .........................................................APPELLANT AND STANDARD CHARTERED BANK KENYA LTD........1ST RESPONDENT LAW SOCIETY OF KENYA........................................ 2ND RESPONDENT (Appeal from the Ruling and Order of the High Court of Kenya at Nairobi - Mr Justice A.I.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF KENYA AT NAIROBI Civil Appeal 162 of 1999 ADMINISTRATORS OF THE ESTATE OF MAXWELL MAURICE OMBOGO (DECEASED) .........................................................APPELLANT AND STANDARD CHARTERED BANK KENYA LTD........1ST RESPONDENT LAW SOCIETY OF KENYA........................................ 2ND RESPONDENT (Appeal from the Ruling and Order of the High Court of Kenya at Nairobi - Mr Justice A.I.
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