Judgment[2006] KEHC 583
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 HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MOMBASA Civil Appeal 59 of 2006 JACKSON NZARO……………………………………………………….APPELLANT VERSUS KAVITA BHATT……………………………………………………….. RESPONDENT J U D G M E N T This is an appeal against the decision of the Principal Magistrate given on the 30th March 2006 allowing the Respondent’s applications dated 17th March 2006 and 15th March 2006 in Mombasa CMCC Numbers 817 of 2006 and 993 of 2006 respectively which had been consolidated.
Division and case type: GeneralUnclassified
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI (CORAM: AKIWUMI, PALL, JJ.A. & BOSIRE, AG.J.A.) CIVIL APPLICATION NO.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI (CORAM: SHAH, J.A. (IN CHAMBERS)) CIVIL APPLICATION NO.
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: GeneralUnclassified
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI CORAM: TUNOI, J.A. (IN CHAMBERS) CIVIL APPLICATION NO.
Division and case type: Commercial and TaxInsolvency Cause
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI (CORAM: NYARANGI, MASIME & COCKAR JJ A) CIVIL APPEAL NO 111 OF 1990 PAUL JOSEPH NGEI …………………...…… APPELLANT VERSUS OFFICIAL RECEIVER……………..….……. RESPONDENT (Appeal from a Ruling and Order of the High Court at Nairobi (Akiwumi J) dated 14th June 1990 in High Court Bankruptcy Cause No 14 of 1988)
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.