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
2,481 judgments, rulings and orders · latest 2 June 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.
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.
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.
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI CRIMINAL DIVISION COURT MARTIAL CRIMINAL APPEAL 5 Of 2016. 87058 SPTE ALLAN OMONDI ANYANGA................APPLICANT AND REPUBLIC.........................................................................RESPONDENT.
Division and case type: Constitutional and Human Rights·Petition
Gikandi argues that he is able to show that it is jurisdictionally possible for conservatory orders to be granted despite the envisaged time-lines in Section 32 of the Act.This is the very subject of his application. In view of the restricted time in Section 32, the application by the Petitioners is made even more urgent.Once more urgent a person alleges contravention of his fundamental rights and freedoms under Section 70 – 83 of the Constitution this court as a Constitutional court must stop i
Co-Operative Bank of Kenya Ltd v Shiraz Shabudin Sayani t/a Makupa AGIP Service Station (Civil Suit 23 of 1999) [1999] KEHC 170 (KLR) (19 April 1999) (Ruling) Co-operative Bank of Kenya Ltd v Shiraz Shabudin Sayani t/a Makupa Agip Service Station [1999] eKLR Neutral citation: [1999] KEHC 170 (KLR) REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT MOMBASA CIVIL SUIT 23 OF 1999 PN WAKI, J APRIL 19, 1999 BETWEEN CO-OPERATIVE BANK OF KENYA LTD .............................................. PLAINTIFF AND SHIRAZ
decision of Lakha, J.A., a learned single judge of this Court, to seek to vary, discharge or reverse his order by the Court under the provisions of rule 54 (2) of the Rules. Oraro has submitted that the respondent having not chosen any of those options he cannot now challenge the consent order which he has not attempted to have set aside.
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI (CORAM: OWUOR, J.A (IN CHAMBERS) CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 62/99) BETWEEN MOSES KIPNGETICH KURGAT ..............................APPLICANT AND THE DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE OF THE LAW SOCIETY ...................................RESPONDENT (Application for stay of execution in an intended appeal from the ruling and order of the High Court of Kenya at Nairobi (Hon.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI (CORAM: OMOLO, SHAH & PALL, JJ.A.) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 292 OF 1997 BETWEEN SAMUEL NGURE GATHII.......................................APPELLANT AND JOSEPHINE WANJIRU MBUGUA................................RESPONDENT (Being an appeal from the judgment of the High Court of Kenya at Nairobi (Hon.
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI (CORAM: TUNOI, SHAH & PALL, JJ.A.) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 75 OF 1997 BETWEEN KENYA CEMENT MARKETING LIMITED............................................APPELLANT AND JAMES G.K.
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF KENYA AT NAIROBI Civil Appeal 112 of 1995 GERALD MBALE MWEA ……………................................................ …………………………..APPELLANT AND KARIKO KIHARA GICHOMO KIHARA ……………………........................................…………………….
Court of Appeal at NairobiJUDGE APPEAL,JusticeCase number Civil Appeal 182 of 1994
Division and case type: Civil·Civil Appeal
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI CIVIL APPEAL NO. 182 OF 1994 MACHAKOS DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE UNION LIMITED……….........APPELLANT AND PHILIP NZUKI KIILU…………………....................................................RESPONDENT (Appeal from a judgment of the High Court of Kenya at Machakos (Honourable Mr.
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF KENYA AT KISUMU CRIMINAL APPEAL 79 OF 1995 FRANCIS ADAMBA DAMBA......................………………….APPELLANT AND REPUBLIC............................………………………………RESPONDENT (Appeal from a conviction and judgment of the High Court of Kenya at Kisii (Mr. Patel) dated 20th May, 1995 IN H.C.CR.APPEAL NO.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI CORAM: GICHERU, AKIWUMI & SHAH, JJ.A.) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 15 OF 1992 KENYA BUS SERVICES lIMITED...........................................................APPELLANT AND SUSAN MUTETI...................................................................................RESPONDENT (Appeal from the Ruling of the High Court of Kenya at Nairobi (Mr.
Court of Appeal at NairobiJUDGE APPEAL,JusticeCase number Civil Appeal 59 of 1991
Division and case type: Civil·Civil Appeal
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI (CORAM: GICHERU, TUNOI & LAKHA, JJ.A) CIVIL APPEAL NO. AGGARWAL Suing in his capacity as executor of Late Lekraj Aggarwal..................................................APPELLANT AND MUNSHIRAM & COMPANY LIMITED....................RESPONDENT (Appeal from the Judgment of the High Court of Kenya at Nairobi (Mr.
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF KENYA AT MOMBASA Civil Appeal 154 & 155 of 1996 JACKLINE MUENI NZIOKA…..…………………….................................... ……………...APPELLANT AND JETHAT RAMJI KERAI……………………................................……………………… RESPONDENT (Appeal from judgment and decree of the High Court of Kenya at Mombasa (Lady Justice Ang’awa) dated 23rd May, 1996 IN H.C.C.C.
10 min read
10 min read
Division and case type:
·
both only saythat appeal lies to the Court of Appeal as of right from adecision of the High Court on order given under prerogativeorders. The application is supported by the affidavit of JonahKip Ngeno, a State Counsel in Mombasa sworn on 24-9-98.