Judgment[2004] KEHC 1089
A F v H A & another
High Court at Meru
Case law
Search tips: "exact phrase" · -exclude · land | property · negligen* · citations like [2023] KEHC 123
Division and case type: Constitutional and Human RightsPetition
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MERU HCCA NO. 72 OF 2004 A F ………………………………………………………… PLAINTIFF VERSUS H A …………………………………..…………..
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT ELDORET Civil Case 10 of 1980 FRANCIS ORIGO...............................................1st PLAINTIFF PETER PANYAKO...........................................2nd PLAINTIFF VERSUS JACOB KUMALI MUNGALA............................... DEFENDANT RULING On 12th May, 2000 the Resident Judge Eldoret, Lady Justice Nambuye wrote to me thus on the above case: - "There is an application for Review pending in theabove file.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT ELDORET Civil Case 10 of 1980 FRANCIS ORIGO...............................................1st PLAINTIFF PETER PANYAKO...........................................2nd PLAINTIFF VERSUS JACOB KUMALI MUNGALA............................... DEFENDANT RULING On 12th May, 2000 the Resident Judge Eldoret, Lady Justice Nambuye wrote to me thus on the above case: - "There is an application for Review pending in theabove file.
Division and case type: Milimani Commercial CourtsCivil Case
so that if the court subsequently adopts that award it may be difficult to execute the resultant order especially at the Land Registry. Learned counsels in this matter do not seem to see all these.Counsel for the applicant is only complaining at the Arbitrator’s misconduct.
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: CivilCivil Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA Dola v Attorney General High Court, at Mombasa August 27, 1992 Omolo J Civil Case No. 327 of 1989 August 27, 1992, Omolo J delivered the following Judgment.
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.