Search court decisions

…In compliance with that order the Commissioner of Prisons appeared represented by the Attorney-General who was assisted by Mr. Chunga, Assistant Deputy Public Prosecutor. Mr. Kiraitu Murungi and Mr.…

…It is contended on behalf of the four detained persons: (a) that these statements are not sufficient to comply with the provisions of section 83(2)(a), and (b) that compliance is mandatory and insufficiency of details invalidates…

…Concerning the grounds alleging that the charge sheet was defective and that there was no complainant or compliance with the section 214 of the Criminal Procedure Code, following a timely intervention by the Court to have…

…Section 83 of the Elections Act, 2011 is quite apt that non-compliance with the law should be such that it affected the results.…

…Section 83 of the Elections Act, 2011 is quite apt that non-compliance with the law should be such that it affected the results. That has not been established by the Applicant.…

…judge’s decision, together with one matter contained in the notice of grounds for affirming the decision, filed under rule 91(1) of the Court of Appeal Rules, namely that the petition should have been dismissed for lack of compliance…

…The respondent filed a notice of grounds for affirming the decision under rule 91 of the Rules of this court and contended that the trial judge ought to have dismissed the petition for want of compliance by the appellant…

…Section 83 of the Elections Act, 2011 is quite apt that non-compliance with the law should be such that it affected the results.…

…Section 83 of the Elections Act, 2011 is quite apt that non-compliance with the law should be such that it affected the results. That has not been established by the Applicant.…

…The Election Court held: “The provision contained in rule 4(3) that a petitioner personally sign the petition was mandatory and not merely discretionary and the petitioner’s non-compliance with it was fatal.” 13.…

…signed by him within the meaning of Sec 65 (2) (1) of the Act of 1932.; and Dennnig L J (expressing no view) said: “The name of the rm being the plainti’s professional name, his signature in the name of the rm was a compliance…

…It was Mr Inamdar’s submission before us that the adavit Mr Johnson Robert Kariuki sworn on 5th December, 1988, was manifestly defective for lack of compliance with the mandatory provisions of RSC 0.75 r 5 (4) and (9).…