Case law
Search tips: "exact phrase" · -exclude · land | property · negligen* · citations like [2023] KEHC 123
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Appeal
Abdirahman & another v National Land Commission & 2 others (Environment and Land Petition E012 of 2025) [2025] KEELC 18471 (KLR) (19 December 2025) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2025] KEELC 18471 (KLR) REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT AT GARISSA ENVIRONMENT AND LAND PETITION E012 OF 2025 MN GICHERU, J DECEMBER 19, 2025 IN THE MATTER OF: THE CONSTITUTION OF KENYA, 2010; IN THE MATTER OF: ARTICLES 1, 2, 3, 10(1) & (2), 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 40, 47, 50(1), 60, 61, 62, 66, 67, 68,
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF KENYA AT NAIROBI Civil Appeal 263 of 2004 ABERDARE FREIGHT SERVICES LTD………………………....APPELLANT AND KENYA REVENUE AUTHORITY……………………………….RESPONDENT (Being an appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of Kenya at Nairobi ( Nyamu, J.) dated 9th November 2004 in MISC APPLICATION NO. 946 OF 2004) *************************** REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT On the 9th of June, 2005 we delivered our judgment in this appeal dismissing it and reserv
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Appeal
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MOMBASA Criminal Appeal 66 of 1998 STEPHEN C. MWANGI..........................................................................
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Appeal
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MOMBASA Criminal Appeal 66 of 1998 STEPHEN C. MWANGI..........................................................................
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: 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 Case
Parliament at the next or any subsequent session. They therefore became invalid and detention orders made became null and void ab initio.