Judgment[2021] KEHC 907
others v Intestate Petroleum Company Limited
Division and case type: Commercial and TaxCase number Winding Up Cause
4 min read
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
It was submitted that there is a dispute regarding ownership of the suit properties. That under Order 40 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules, where there is proof that any property in dispute is in a danger of being wasted, damaged, alienated or disposed of, the court ought to grant a temporary injunction to restrain such acts.
Division and case type: Commercial and TaxCase number Winding Up Cause
Division and case type: Constitutional and Human RightsConstitutional Petition
Division and case type: Constitutional and Human RightsPetition
In light of what I have stated, I hereby make the following orders; a) The petitioner shall continue to be held in Lang’ata Women’s Prison or such other place as may be designated by the Minister in terms of section 43(2)(b) of the Citizenship and Immigration Act, 2011 pending her removal from Kenya or pending such time as any claim lodged by her, within 30 days from the date hereof, is determined by a competent authority under relevant legislation. b) The Prison authorities shall ensure tha
Division and case type: Milimani Commercial CourtsCivil Suit
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Case
Division and case type: CivilCivil Suit
Division and case type: GeneralUnclassified
Division and case type: CivilCivil Suit
Division and case type: GeneralUnclassified
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: 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 Case
There is no difficulty in complying with an order to that effect. It was a prayer for an order allowing the applicant to manifest her religion by doing a specific and clear act, namely, wearing her headscarf.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Case
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Appeal
stated that the owner of the lorry to show cause why maize and lorry should not be forfeited, that order did not preclude the owner of the maize to appear if he was not the owner of the lorry, and claim his maize. The appellants aware of that order as it was made in their presence at the sitting in which the court had convicted them and during the continuation of the same proceedings as it is apparent from the Court record of the proceedings of that day.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Suit
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal