Judgment[1985] KEHC 6
Case law
Search tips: "exact phrase" · -exclude · land | property · negligen* · citations like [2023] KEHC 123
Division and case type: Anti-CorruptionMiscellaneous 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.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Suit
and Mr Jayantilal Shah of that firm took over his defence. He applied on October 11, 1982 for an order that his firm should cease to act for the defendant because it could get no further instructions in the suit from the defendant which the defendant said he had not alternative but to accept and it was all right if the firm did not wish to represent him.
Division and case type: Milimani Commercial CourtsCivil Case
In view of this defence and the issue framed upon it, I drew the attention of the learned counsel to order XIV, rule 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules, and it was agreed that the 10th issue be determined as preliminary issue by the court. In support of this defence Mr Nowrojee (with Mr I Kapila for the defendants) referred me to various passages in The Encyclopaedia of Forms and Precedents, 4th edition volume 9 and Halsbury’s Laws of England, 4th edition, volume 18, the substance of which is th