We use strictly necessary cookies to run the site. With your consent we also use performance cookies to understand how the site is used. Read the cookie policy.
Court decisions & case law | Wakili Link
Case law
Search court decisions
47,624 judgments, rulings and orders · latest 21 September 2026
Search tips:"exact phrase" · -exclude · land | property · negligen* · citations like [2023] KEHC 123
Division and case type: Environment and Land·Petition
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: Constitutional and Human Rights·Petition
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 DIVISION·Civil Appeal
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI (CORAM: KOOME, OKWENGU & KANTAI, JJ.A.) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 292 OF 2014 BETWEEN AGGREY CHITERI…………………….........................APPELLANT AND REPUBLIC OF KENYA……....…..…………………..…RESPONDENT (An appeal from the Judgment of the High Court of Kenya at Nairobi (Majanja J.), dated 30th May, 2014 in High Court Petition No.
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI (CORAM: GICHERU, SHAH & BOSIRE JJ.A) CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 27 OF 1999 BETWEEN FRED KIPCHUMBA CHEPKWONY...............................APPELLANT AND REPUBLIC....................................................................RESPONDENT (Appeal from a conviction and judgment of the High Court of Kenya in Embu (Mr.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI (Coram:Gachuhi, Akiwumi & Lakha JJ A ) CIVIL APPEAL NO 116 OF 1987 Between FRANCIS WAINAINA ....................................................APPELLANT AND KENYA COMMERCIAL FINANCE CO. LTD...............RESPONDENT (Appeal from a judgment of the High Court of Kenya at Nairobi (Lady Justice Aluoch) dated 25th day of February, 1987 in HCCC No 2539 of 1981) ********************* JUDGMENT OF THE COURT The appellant won a contract to supply Kenya Breweries with
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI ( Coram: Gachuhi, Omolo & Akiwumi JJ A) CIVIL APPEAL NO. KARIUKI ……………….................................…………….……………….APPELLANT AND HON.
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT NAIROBI CIVIL SUIT NO 2461 OF 1992 GITHUNGURI & ANOTHER T/A GITHUNGURI & COLLINS ARCHITECTS …….……..APPLICANT VERSUS KENYA RAILWAYS CORPORATION….…………… DEFENDANT
Division and case type: Criminal·Case number Criminal Application
Imanyara v Republic High Court, at Nairobi May 9, 1991 Porter J Criminal Application No 190 of 1991 Criminal Practice and Procedure – bail –renewed application for bail – whether a rehearing of a previous bail application . Criminal Practice and Procedure – bail – whether an applicant is entitled to apply for bail as many times as he can – section 123(3) Criminal Procedure Code.
For all the foregoing reasons, then, I would allow the appeal, I would set aside the learned judge’s order striking out the winding up petition and I would order that the petition should proceed to hearing subject to the Rules being complied with. I would not make any order regarding prayer five in the memorandum of appeal as regards the proposed further advertisements, and I agree that the notice of grounds for affirming the decision should be dismissed.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI (Coram: Kneller, Nyarangi JJA & Platt Ag JA) CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 14 OF 1985 Between ANWAR KIPNGETICH ......................................APPELLANT AND REPUBLIC......................................................RESPONDENT (Appeal from the High Court at Nairobi, O’Kubasu J) JUDGMENT OF THE COURT November 12, 1985, Kneller, Nyarangi JJA & Platt Ag JA delivered the following Judgment.
Division and case type: Anti-Corruption·Miscellaneous Criminal Application
tends as a direction to the Court hearing the application for Order of Prohibition to grant the Order without using its own discretion whether it should do so. The Attorney-General did not need any authority, nor a reminder, that in the light of the opinions expressed by the Constitutional Court he could terminate the proceedings even when coupled with a wet hope that he would do so.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI (Coram: Kneller Hancox JJ A and Chesoni Ag J A) CRIMINAL APPEAL NO 37 OF 1984 BETWEEN GILBERT CHEGE ………………………………….. APPELLANT AND REPUBLIC ………………………………………….
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI ( Coram:Hancox JA, Chesoni & Nyarangi Ag JJA ) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1 OF 1982 BETWEEN MORJARIA.................................................................................APPELLANT AND ABDALLA...............................................................................RESPONDENT (In an appeal from the High Court at Nakuru, Mead J)
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI (Coram:Hancox JA) CIVIL APPLICATION NO NAI 56 OF 1983 BETWEEN SAMUEL MBUGUA GITHERE …….........……APPLICANT AND KIMUNGU…………………………………RESPONDENT (In an intended appeal from the High Court at Nairobi, Gachuhi J) RULING This application is in two parts, the first to extend the time for filing the notice of appeal and the second to extend the time for instituting the appeal which, the applicant’s notice of motion filed on November 15, 1983, states: “... shall be made
High Court at NairobiCourt,HoweverCase number Criminal Appeal 6 of 1983
Division and case type: Milimani Commercial Courts·Criminal Appeal
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI CRIMINAL APPEAL APPLICATION NO. 6 OF 1983 JAMES ODEMBA OTIENO...............................APPELLANT VERSUS REPUBLIC.......................................................RESPONDENT (Appeal from Conviction and Sentence of the Court Martial at 7th Kenya Rifles Langata Barracks, Nairobi)
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.