Omaiko v Republic
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Appeal
Case law
Search tips: "exact phrase" · -exclude · land | property · negligen* · citations like [2023] KEHC 123
Full-text search is temporarily limited — results match titles and citations only.
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Appeal
Division and case type: Constitutional and Human RightsPetition
I therefore find that the application for revision dated 29th July, 2020 is devoid of any merit and is hereby dismissed. The exparte orders granted on 30th July, 2020 staying the lower court proceedings are automatically vacated by the dismissal of the application.
Division and case type: CONSTITUTIONAL AND HUMAN RIGHTS DIVISIONCivil Appeal
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Appeal
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Appeal
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
Division and case type: GeneralUnclassified
Division and case type: GeneralUnclassified
Division and case type: CivilCivil Case
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Appeal
pursuant to the appellate powers of that court. The section does not expressly state that all such orders shall be appealable to this Court.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
Macharia v Mungai (Civil Appeal 85 of 1990) [1995] KECA 165 (KLR) (18 October 1995) (Judgment) G.K. Macharia & another v Lucy N.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
When the application came before Aluoch J ex parte on 25th April 1994, she declined to grant the orders sought by the Mayor and directed that all the defendants be served as the matter was of some general public interest. She adjourned the application to 26th April 1994 for hearing inter partes.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
was not a party to the suit in the superior court; and the learned trial judge’s error in making orders regarding the burial of the deceased which were incapable of performance. In regard to the foregoing grounds of appeal, counsel for the appellants, Miss Abida Ali who appeared with Miss Betty Murungi, submitted that the fact that the deceased became apostate did not dissolve his marriage to the rst appellant as there was no evidence that that fact was communicated to her.