Judgment[2011] KEHC 486
Case law
Search tips: "exact phrase" · -exclude · land | property · negligen* · citations like [2023] KEHC 123
Division and case type: FamilySuccession Cause
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MERU SUCCESSION CAUSE NO. 79 OF 2007 ANNE KENDI MBAYA............................................................................................PETITIONER VERSUS JONATHAN M’NKANATA M’MUGWIKA............................................................OBJECTOR R U L I N G This is an application by petitioner Anne Kendi Mbaya brought under Section 47 of the Law of Succession Act and Rule 73 of the Probate and Administration Rules.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MOMBASA CIVIL CASE NO. LOWE & COMPANY LIMITED …………………………….PLAINTIFF VERSUS CREDIT AGRICOLE INDOSUEZ …………………………1ST DEFENDANT BANK OF AFRICA KENYA LIMITED …………...…….….2ND DEFENDANT REGISTRAR OF TITLES, MOMBASA …………….…….3RD DEFENDANT RULING AND/OR DIRECTIONS A fundamental issue has arisen in respect of the application dated 30.10.2010 by the 1st Defendant and which all parties agree will have crucial consequences or ramifications depe
Division and case type: Constitutional and Human RightsPetition
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MALINDI MATRIMONIAL CAUSE NO. 14 OF 2008 C.A.M……………………………......................…PLAINTIFF -VERSUSW.T.C…………………………..………………....DEFENDANT RULING C.M.A (the petitioner) has filed this cause against W.T.C (the respondent) in which she petitions for the dissolution of the marriage between her and the respondent.
Division and case type: CivilMiscellaneous Civil Application
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MALINDI MATRIMONIAL CAUSE NO. 14 OF 2008 C.A.M……………………………......................…PLAINTIFF -VERSUSW.T.C…………………………..………………....DEFENDANT RULING C.M.A (the petitioner) has filed this cause against W.T.C (the respondent) in which she petitions for the dissolution of the marriage between her and the respondent.
Division and case type: Constitutional and Human RightsPetition
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
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF KENYA AT MOMBASA Civil Appeal (Appli) 164 of 2005 ABDULSHAKOOR KHANDWALLA…………APPLICANT/RESPONDENT AND EAST AFRICAN BUILDING SOCIETY……..RESPONDENT/APPELLANT (Application to strike out record of appeal in an appeal from the ruling and order of the High Court of Kenya at Mombasa (Maraga J) dated 11th June, 2004 in H.C.C.C. 30 OF 1994) ******************** RULING OF THE COURT This is an application under Rule 80 of the Court of Appeal Rules (Rules) for
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: CriminalCriminal Appeal
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MOMBASA Criminal Appeal 251 of 2005 ERNEST MWALUA LOMBO ............................................................... APPELLANT - Versus - REPUBLIC ......................................................….................................
Division and case type: CivilCivil Suit
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MOMBASA Civil Suit 237 of 1999 ABDALLA A. BAJABER….………………….………………….………PLAINTIFFS VERSUS CHEPKWE HOLDINGS LTD & ENOCK TUITOK .…………………………………………………….DEFENDANTS R U L I N G This is an application brought by the defendants under Order 9B Rule 8, Order 21 Rules 22, 25 and 54 of the Civil Procedure Rules and Section 3A of the Civil Procedure Act.
Division and case type: Employment and Labour Relationsmiscellaneous cause
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MOMBASA MISC. APPLICATION NO.527.04 IN THE MATTER OF: EXHUMATION OF THE BODY OF ANNA NAFULA UWE AND PIUS WEYUSIA WAMALABE ……………………………………… APPLICANT VERSUS THE ATTORNEY GENERAL ……………………………….……..
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: CivilMiscellaneous Application
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: CriminalCriminal Appeal
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MOMBASA APPELLATE SIDE FRANCIS AGANDA ………………………………………………APPELLANT V E R S U S REPUBLIC …………………………………………………………RESPONDENT Consolidated With CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 44 OF 2001 STEPHEN MALIOLO ……………………………………………..APPELLANT V E R S U S REPUBLIC ………………………………………………………….
Division and case type: CivilCivil Case
REPUBLICOF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT EMBU CIVIL CASE NO. 89 OF 2000 FLORENCE WAMBUI MWANGI ……………………………PLAINTIFF VERSUS MICHAEL WARUI GITHINJI ………………………………DEFENDANT J U D G M E N T Florence Wambui Mwangi brought this suit in her capacity as the Administratrix of the Estate of her late sister Jane Nyambura Mwangi seeking general and special damages under the Fatal Accidents Act and the Law Reform Act against Michael Warui Githinji and James Macharia (hereinafter referred to as 1st & 2
Division and case type: CivilCivil Suit
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MOMBASA CIVIL SUIT NO. 73 OF 2002 DIETRICH BOELLING ….…….……………..
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Appeal
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MOMBASA CRIMINAL APPPEAL 52 OF 2003 GEORGE OMONDI .……….…………………………..……APPELLANT VERSUS REPUBLIC ....….…………………………………...….... RESPONDENT J U D G M E NT George Omondi, the appellant, was convicted for Shop Breaking and committing a felony contrary to Section 306(a) Penal Code.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT MOMBASA MISCELLANEOUS CIVIL CASE NO 476 OF 2003 REPUBLIC ……………………….………...... APPLICANT VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF POLICE ………….
Division and case type: Constitutional and Human RightsElection Petition
Appeal went to great lengths to examine the relevant authorities and I totally agree with their conclusion on that issue. However in this case in considering the legal effect of the Act and the rules and particularly sections 14 (1) (a) and 14 (2) the provisions of the Interpretation and General Provisions Act (cap 2) set out namely section 24 and section 33 were not considered.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Suit
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MOMBASA Civil Suit 74 of 2002 BEATRICE AGOLA OPONDO………...........................................…………………….PLAINTIFF VERSUS SWALEH SALIM SAID………….....................................…………………………..DEFENDANT
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Appeal
REPUBLIC OF KENYA COURT OF APPEAL AT MOMBASA Criminal Appeal 138 of 2002 ABDIRAHMAN ALI ABDI …………………….................…………………….. APPELLANT AND REPUBLIC ……………………………….............……….………………….