Judgment[2000] KECA 12
ADMINISTRATORS OF THE ESTATE OF MAXWELL MAURICE OMBOGO v STANDARD CHARTERED BANK KENYA LTD & ANOTHER
Court of Appeal at Nairobi
Case law
Search tips: "exact phrase" · -exclude · land | property · negligen* · citations like [2023] KEHC 123
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF KENYA AT NAIROBI Civil Appeal 162 of 1999 ADMINISTRATORS OF THE ESTATE OF MAXWELL MAURICE OMBOGO (DECEASED) .........................................................APPELLANT AND STANDARD CHARTERED BANK KENYA LTD........1ST RESPONDENT LAW SOCIETY OF KENYA........................................ 2ND RESPONDENT (Appeal from the Ruling and Order of the High Court of Kenya at Nairobi - Mr Justice A.I.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF KENYA AT NAIROBI Civil Appeal 162 of 1999 ADMINISTRATORS OF THE ESTATE OF MAXWELL MAURICE OMBOGO (DECEASED) .........................................................APPELLANT AND STANDARD CHARTERED BANK KENYA LTD........1ST RESPONDENT LAW SOCIETY OF KENYA........................................ 2ND RESPONDENT (Appeal from the Ruling and Order of the High Court of Kenya at Nairobi - Mr Justice A.I.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF KENYA AT NAIROBI Civil Appeal 162 of 1999 ADMINISTRATORS OF THE ESTATE OF MAXWELL MAURICE OMBOGO (DECEASED) .........................................................APPELLANT AND STANDARD CHARTERED BANK KENYA LTD........1ST RESPONDENT LAW SOCIETY OF KENYA........................................ 2ND RESPONDENT (Appeal from the Ruling and Order of the High Court of Kenya at Nairobi - Mr Justice A.I.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Case
In absence of any indication my brother was correct in proceeding with he trial on 20.3.96 under order 9b CPR. From the evidence before the court the plaintiff stated that he boarded the defendants lorry.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
This is one of the exceptions to the general rule that a party against whom an ex parte order has been made can only apply to the court which made the order to set it aside.”. This court, in its more recent decision in the case of Michael Miana and K.