Judgment[2024] KEHC 16486
Case law
Search tips: "exact phrase" · -exclude · land | property · negligen* · citations like [2023] KEHC 123
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Case
Agengo v Republic (Criminal Revision E268 of 2024) [2024] KEHC 16486 (KLR) (30 December 2024) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2024] KEHC 16486 (KLR) REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT KISUMU CRIMINAL REVISION E268 OF 2024 RE ABURILI, J DECEMBER 30, 2024 BETWEEN DAVID MESIA AGENGO ........................................................................ APPLICANT AND REPUBLIC ............................................................................................
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Case
Agengo v Republic (Criminal Revision E268 of 2024) [2024] KEHC 16486 (KLR) (30 December 2024) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2024] KEHC 16486 (KLR) REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT KISUMU CRIMINAL REVISION E268 OF 2024 RE ABURILI, J DECEMBER 30, 2024 BETWEEN DAVID MESIA AGENGO ........................................................................ APPLICANT AND REPUBLIC ............................................................................................
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Case
Otieno v Republic (Criminal Appeal 7 of 2012) [2013] KEHC 277 (KLR) (30 December 2013) (Judgment) Marcella Nyabonyi Otieno v Republic [2013] eKLR Neutral citation: [2013] KEHC 277 (KLR) REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT KISII CRIMINAL APPEAL 7 OF 2012 EN MAINA & SO OKONG'O, JJ DECEMBER 30, 2013 BETWEEN MARCELLA NYABONYI OTIENO ...................................................... APPELLANT AND REPUBLIC ........................................................................................
Division and case type: Environment and LandCivil Appeal
Ogolla v Onyango Otunga & Company Advocates (Civil Appeal E101 of 2023) [2023] KEHC 27214 (KLR) (27 December 2023) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2023] KEHC 27214 (KLR) REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT KISUMU CIVIL APPEAL E101 OF 2023 RE ABURILI, J DECEMBER 27, 2023 BETWEEN GEORGE OGOLLA .................................................................................. APPELLANT AND ONYANGO OTUNGA & COMPANY ADVOCATES ......................
Division and case type: CivilCivil Suit
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT KITALE WINDING UP CAUSE N0. 01 OF 2011 IN THE MATTER OF THE COMPANIES ACT CHAPTER 486 AND IN THE MATTER OF INTESTATE PETROLEUM COMPANY LIMITED AFRICA OIL TURKANA (K) LIMITED..................1ST PETITIONER AFRICAN OIL CORPORATION ..............................2ND PETITIONER AFRICAN OIL KENYA BV .......................................
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAKURU CRIMINAL CASE NO.8 OF 2007 REPUBLIC…………………………………………………………..PROSECUTOR VERSUS WILLIAM KIPRONO TOWETT Alias NDUME….………..……….1ST ACCUSED WILLIAM KIPKURUI SITONIK……….………………....…………2ND ACCUSED RULING Both accused person are charged jointly that on 15th October, 2006 at Koita Village in Keringet, Molo they murdered Simon Nganga. They denied the offence and their trial commenced before Maraga, J (as he then was).
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAKURU CIVIL APPEAL NO.215 OF 2009 ANALIK WEKESA…………………………………….……….……....1ST APPELLANT DIOCESE OF LODWAR (Thro’ its Registered Trustees...........….........2ND APPELLANT VERSUS HELLEN WAIRIMU MWANGI & SIMON NJOROGE MWANGI (Suing as the Administrators of the estate ofJAMES KANENE MWANGI (Deceased)….................……....RESPONDENT RULING The Memorandum of appeal was filed on 21st October, 2009 simultaneously with application for stay of execution. The stay was gran
Division and case type: CriminalCase number Criminal Application
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAKURU Criminal Appli 133 of 2007 AHMED ALI……………………………....………APPLICANT VERSUS REPUBLIC…………………………………...RESPONDENT RULING The applicant, Ahmed Ali, was charged before the Naivasha Chief Magistrate’s Court with the offence of fraudulent false accounting contrary to Section 330 of the Penal Code. The value of the subject of the fraud was stated as Ksh.5,108,210/=.
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Appeal
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAKURU Criminal Appeal 44 & 45 of 2004 BENJAMINE NJOROGE KIMANI…………1ST APPELLANT BENSON ORWA MIDILA..…………………2ND APPELLANT VERSUS REPUBLIC………………………………..…….RESPONDENT (From original conviction and sentence in Criminal Case No.1451 of 2003 of the Senior resident Magistrate’s Court at R. Kirui, SRM) JUDGMENT OF THE COURT The appellants were charged with the offence of robbery with violence contrary to Section 296(2) of the Penal Code.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Appeal
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAKURU Civil Appeal 30 of 1997 [Being an appeal from the Judgment of Honourable Japhet Mahasi – R.M in Resident Magistrate’s Court - Kabarnet, Land/Civil case Nos. 1 & 2 of 1992 dated the 24th March 1997] DANIEL KIPKEMEI CHEROGONY ...…...………….…...
Division and case type: FamilySuccession Cause
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAKURU Succession Cause 500 of 1997 IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF THE LATE KIBOWEN KOMEN WILLIAM KIPROP KOMEN………………………………. …….PETITIONER VERSUS RACHEL KIPNGENO KOMEN………….……………………..… OBJECTOR RULING The applicant herein, Agrisup Limited, filed an application by way of a chamber summons under the provisions of Sections 47, 51, 66, 74, 83 and 86 of the Law of Succession Act Cap 160 and Rules 7(d), 16 and 49 of Probate and Administration Rules.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Suit
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAKURU Civil Suit 125 of 2004 ABDI YASIN KOIKAI…………...………………………….........…..………..PLAINTIFF VERSUS OLE NAKUYAKI SAMSON & 11 OTHERS ………….....…………..….DEFENDANTS RULING The 1st to 10th defendants raised a preliminary objection to the Plaintiff’s suit on the grounds that the suit was misconceived, incompetent and bad in law as it contravened the provisions of Section 28 of the Land (Group Representatives) Act Cap 287. They also said that it contravened
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAKURU CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 121 OF 2004 (From original conviction and sentence in Criminal Case No.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAKURU CIVIL CASE NO. 104 OF 1999 STEPHEN NJOROGE KIBOI………..…………………………PLAINTIFF VERSUS DANIEL NGULI KYALO……………………………….1ST DEFENDANT MASAI ITUMO…………………………………………2ND DEFENDANT RULING The Plaintiff filed this suit against the Defendants on 12th March, 1999.
Division and case type: CriminalCriminal Appeal
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAKURU CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 214 OF 2002 GEORGE KAGUORA NDUATI……………………………..APPELLANT VERSUS REPUBLIC…………………………………………………..RESPONDENT J U D G M E N T The appellant had been charged for the offence of assault causing actual bodily harm contrary to Section 251 of the Penal Code.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Case
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT KISUMU CIVIL CASE NO. DANIEL ………………………………..PLAINTIFF VERSUS JAMES M.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Case
REPULIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAKURU CIVIL SUIT NO. 384 OF 2000 ESTHER WANJIRU KIARIE …………………………………..PLAINTIFF VERSUS JOSEPH KIARIE NG’ANG’A ………………………………..DEFENDANT
Division and case type: CivilCivil Suit
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAKURU Civil Suit 447 of 1996 HILLARY MUNUHE GACHINGA......................................... PLAINTIFF VERSUS NORWEGIAN PEOPLE'S AID..................................
Division and case type: CivilCivil Case
The respondents swear that they were prepared to accept the applicants papers if they were in order despite the order from the Chief Magistrate, Nakuru if the same were presented within the prescribed time. No attempt was made to present the papers within the prescribed time.
Division and case type: CivilCivil Suit
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAKURU CIVIL SUIT NO. 375 OF 1992 RICHARD BOYWA GOR................................................................................PLAINTIFF VERSUS EAST AFRICAN SUGAR INDUSTRIES LTD.............................................DEFENDANT