Judgment[1989] KECA 48
Owners of the Motor Vessel “Lillian S" v Caltex Oil
Court of Appeal at Mombasa
Case law
Search tips: "exact phrase" · -exclude · land | property · negligen* · citations like [2023] KEHC 123
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
That evidence so far as it was adduced by the respondent fell foul of the requirements of rule 5 of Order 75: it failed to establish that the appellant was “the relevant “person”. The upshot of that is that the High Court did not have admiralty jurisdiction and the respondent was not entitled to invoke that jurisdiction.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT MOMBASA (Coram: Gachuhi, Nyarangi & Gicheru JJ A) CIVIL APPEAL NO 16 OF 1989 MAKALA MAILU MUMENDE ........................................PLAINTIFF VERSUS NYALI GOLF & COUNTRY CLUB....................................DEFENDANT
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Appeal
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MOMBASA CRIMINAL APPEAL NO 60 OF 1989 BETWEEN DAVID MAINA...................................................... APPELLANT AND REPUBLIC.............................................................RESPONDENT
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Appeal
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MOMBASA CRIMINAL APPEAL NO 364 OF 1989 BETWEEN MALINGI KATANA MALINGI................................. APPELLANT AND REPUBLIC................................................................RESPONDENT
Division and case type: CivilCivil Case
On the prepondrance of evidence before me as a whole, I cannot help reaching the inescapable conclusion on such evidence, that the 2nd Defendant was not an innocent purchaser for value of the shit land. I am satisfied that it has been established on a balance of probabilities that he was very much aware when he entered into a written agreement with the 1st Defendant (Exhibit A) on the 5th of October, 1987 for the purchase of the suit land that the said land had then been sold to the Plaintiff wh
Division and case type: CivilCivil Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT MOMBASA CIVIL CASE NO 686 OF 1986 MOSES WAITHANJI MINGIRE……………………PLAINTIFF VERSUS ATTORNEY GENERAL……………………………DEFENDANT
Division and case type: CivilCivil Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT MOMBASA CIVIL CASE NO 414 OF 1985 KANTABEN NEMCHAND SHAH ………..……. PLAINTIFF VERSUS APOLLO BWONYA ORODHO RINAH ORODHO BWONYA EDWARD CHARLES OHARE ………………DEFENDANTS
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Appeal
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT MOMBASA (Coram: Masime, J.A., Gicheru & Kwach, Ag. JJ.A.) CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Case
was however fault attributable to imprudence. It is the type of mistake which a court can excuse in order to do justice to the parties in a particular case.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT MOMBASA CIVIL CASE NO 771 OF 1980 MEDITERRANEAN SHIPPING COMPANY SA …………………..... PLAINTIFF VERSUS INTERNATIONAL AGRICULTURE ENTERPRISES LTD & ETCO (MSA)LIMITED…………………………………… DEFENDANTS RULING The action herein was for damages based on demurrage of a motor vessel “Penny S”.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Suit
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT MOMBASA CIVIL SUIT NO 496 OF 1988 RANDU NZAU ……………..…………….….. APPLICANT VERSUS MBUNI TRANSPORT CO LTD…....….…..
Division and case type: CivilCivil Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT MOMBASA CIVIL CASE NO 690 OF 1988 SHAH T/A PRASUL’S…………………………..APPLICANT VERSUS STEELCORD TYRES LTD…………………….. DEFENDANT RULING This is an application by the plaintiff for summary judgment under order 35 Civil Procedure Rules.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT MOMBASA CIVIL CASE NO 767 OF 1987 CITY SERVICE STATION……............….……….. APPLICANT VERSUS JAMRECK PETER NJUGUNA …...………...… RESPONDENT RULING This is an application by the defendant in the suit that the ex-parte judgment entered against him on 25/2/88 be set aside on the grounds that he was never served with summons to enter appearance and that he does not owe the plaintiff the sum claimed.
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Appeal
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT MOMBASA (Coram: Gachuhi, Masime JJA & Kwach Ag JA) CRIMINAL APPEAL NO 78 OF 1988 BETWEEN KARATON OLE LESARAU...................................... APPELLANT VERSUS REPUBLIC...............................................................
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT MOMBASA (Coram: Platt, Gachuhi JJA & Masime Ag JA) CIVIL APPEAL NO 91 OF 1987 Between NANDWA....................................................................PLAINTIFF AND KENYA KAZI LTD.................................................RESPONDENT (Appeal from the High Court at Mombasa, Bosire J)
Division and case type: CivilCase number Civil Application
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT MOMBASA (Coram: Platt, Gachuhi JJA &Masime Ag JA) CIVIL APPLICATION NO NAI 143 OF 1987 BETWEEN LYDIA WANJIRU MWANGI........................................APPELLANT AND RAJNIKANT JOSHI...............................................RESPONDENT (Application for extension of time to file an appeal from a Ruling of the High Court at Mombasa, Bhandari J) RULING January 28, 1988, Platt, Gachuhi JJA & Masime Ag JA delivered the following Ruling. There are before the Court tw
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT MOMBASA (CORAM: PLATT, APALOO JJA & MASIME Ag JA) CIVIL APPEAL NO 67 OF 1985 SECURICOR (KENYA) LIMITED…….......…………………….APPLICANT VERSUS EA DRAPERS LIMITED …………………….……….....1ST DEFENDANT COMBINED WAREHOUSES LIMITED…..……….…..1ST DEFENDANT (Appeal from the High Court at Mombasa, Bhandari J) RULING The applicant Securicor (K) Limited, gave notice on October 21 1986 that it would move the court for an order that leave be granted to the applicant, to amend the applicant’s
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Appeal
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT MOMBASA (CORAM: PLATT, GACHUHI & APALOO JJA) CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 217 OF 1986 BETWEEN HAMISI BAKARI ……..................….……1ST APPELLANT RUKIA DZERI ……......................….……2ND APPELLANT AND REPUBLIC……………………....…………RESPONDENT JUDGMENT OF THE COURT The appellants, Hamisi Bakari and Rukia Dzeri were charged with burglary and theft contrary to sections 304(2) and 279(b) of the Penal Code.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT MOMBASA CORAM: MILLER CJ, NYARANGI & PLATT JJ A CIVIL APPEAL NO. 92 OF 1986 ALOYCE MARIERA ………………………........… APPELLANT VERSUS KENYA BUS SERVICES (MSA) LTD…………..….DEFENDANT (Appeal from the High Court at Mombasa, Bhandari J)
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT MOMBASA (Coram: Hancox, Nyarangi and Platt, JJ A) CIVIL APPEAL NO 49 OF 1984 BETWEEN ABDALLA HUSSEIN KILO………………………………….……….. APPELLANT AND KOMBO KASSIM OMAR IDA-SA-GODANA RANCHING CO-OP SOCIETY…....……….…RESPONDENTS (Appeal from a judgment of the High Court of Kenya at Mombasa (Bhandari, J) dated October 13, 1983 In High Court Civil Case No 26 of 1983) ________________ JUDGMENT OF HANCOX, J A I have had the advantage of reading in draft the judgment of Platt,