Court decisions & case law

Judgment[1998] KEHC 11030 September 1998

Judgment[1998] KEHC 17930 September 1998

CONTINENTAL DEVELOPERS LTD v SAUTI HOUSING CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY

High Court at Nairobiit was fully paid on condition that out of theloan of shs,Gatonye,Mitambo,Ogano,Rachi,Rachi applicant Mr,Rachi Applicant,Kariuki,Kariuki Mr,Mitambo Defendant,Mitambo We,Gatonye says Co,Rachi proceed Mr,Gatonye They,Gatonye Give,Rachu,Rao,Gatonye last Friday,Rachi We,Rao If,Gatonye serve Mr,Rao absent Mr,Muruthi,Koyoko,MitiamboCivil Case 933 of 1996

Division and case type: CivilCivil Case

REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI (NAIROBI LAW COURTS) Civil Case 933 of 1996 CONTINENTAL DEVELOPERS LTD............................................................. PLAINTIFF VERSUS SAUTI HOUSING CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD................................

application succeedsAllowed2 min read

Judgment[1994] KECA 11721 April 1994

Moi v Matiba; Electoral Commission & another

Court of Appeal at NairobiJUDGE APPEAL,Inmadar,Inamdar,Matiba,Kariuki,Kariuki being Re WhitleyCivil Appeal 176 of 1993

Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal

prospective petitioner is to strictly adhere to and observe the rules prescribed in the procedure in order to be able to enjoy the rights to which he is entitled under the Constitution. So if the petitioner has failed to meet any obligation which happens to be of a mandatory nature then it will equally defeat the purpose of the Constitution and the Act if the breach of the mandatory obligation is viewed with a blind eye.

76 min read

Judgment[1993] KEHC 2020 September 1993

PRUDENTIAL FINANCE LIMITED v JOHNSON NGANGA MBUGUA

High Court at NairobiDugdale,Bunei,Kariuki,Mutua,Mbugua,WilsonKipkoti Managing Director,Kipkoti,Wilson Kipkoti,NgugiCase number Civil Suit 3512 of 1990

Division and case type: CivilCivil Suit

REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI MILIMANI LAW COURTS Civil Suit 3512 of 1990 PRUDENTIAL FINANCE LIMITED........................... PLAINTIFF VERSUS JOHNSON NGANGA MBUGUA............................DEFENDANT

14 min read

Judgment[1991] KEHC 1917 March 1991

Kimani v Republic

High Court at MombasaattackCriminal Appeal 266 of 1990

Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Appeal

REPUBLIC OF KENYA Kimani v Republic High Court, at Mombasa March 18, 1991 Wambilyangah J Criminal Appeal Case No 266 of 1990 (From original conviction and sentence in Criminal Case No 269 of 1990 of the Resident Magistrate’s Court at Voi, JM Manyasi (Miss) RM) Evidence – identification evidence – accused momentarily encountering his attacker who later blindfolds him – whether circumstances conducive for proper identification - whether known foot marks can be used to support allegation of the pre

Appeal allowedAllowed4 min read

Judgment[1990] KECA 2519 February 1990

MUNGA CONCRETE WORKS LTD v INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD

Court of Appeal at NairobiJudge specifically holds HCCC,JUDGE APPEAL,KariukiCivil Case No 3131 of 1988

Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal

REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF KENYA AT NAIROBI CIVIL APPEAL 18 OF 89 Munga Concrete Works Ltd.......................appellant v Industrial Development Bank Ltd..............respondent Judgment. The background facts giving rise to this appeal can be stated briefly.

appeal is allowedAllowed6 min read

Judgment[1989] KECA 4816 November 1989

Owners of the Motor Vessel “Lillian S" v Caltex Oil

Court of Appeal at MombasaAct,Bosire,JUDGE APPEAL,Inamdar,Alexander,Satchu,Kariuki,Saliarelis,Tsakiris,PLSCivil Appeal 50 of 1989

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.

Appeal allowedAllowed77 min read

Judgment[1984] KECA 428 June 1984

Choge & 3 others v Republic

Court of Appeal at NairobiJudge Assessors,Judge Assessors Mr,Judge did direct Assessors,judge find Musamali,judge rely Dr,judge could rely upon Dr,JUDGE APPEAL,Etyang,Kapila,Kibuthu,Witte,Musyoka Annan,Kariuki,Kibithu,Gathua Dr,Patel Dr Gathua,Njenga,Okoko,Muliro,Elgon Studio,Patel Dr,Musyoka,Kapila compared Baraza,Patel found Peter,Okoko Inspector Munyole,Etyang invited Court,Tuwei,Kapila made regarding Okumu,Otieno,Etyang stated Musamali,Kantilal Patel Dr,Gathua examined Musamali,Patel,MusyokaAnnanCase number Criminal Appeal 69 of 1984

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.

77 min read