Kenya Case Law

Kopo Kopo Inc v Kalee t/a Bei Nafuu Enterptises-Redsoil

Kopo Kopo Inc v Kalee t/a Bei Nafuu Enterptises-Redsoil (Commercial Case E6792 of 2026) [2026] SCC 223 (KLR) (14 August 2026) (Judgment)

Court

Small Claims Court

Case number

Commercial Case E6792 of 2026

Judge

["GW Kiamah"]

The claimant proved the loan disbursement and the respondent's partial repayment, but the court found the contracted interest and charges excessive, unconscionable, and inequitable. The court therefore declined to enforce the claimed interest as written and instead limited recovery to principal-based interest at 18% per annum for the six-month contractual period, less the amount already repaid, with the balance attracting court-rate interest from judgment.

Source excerpt

• Loan recovery
• Unconscionable interest
• Burden of proof
• Default in undefended proceedings
• In duplum principle
• Costs

Sheppard & another v Mukola (Appeal E283 of 2024)

Sheppard & another v Mukola (Appeal E283 of 2024) [2026] KEELRC 2405 (KLR) (14 August 2026) (Ruling)

Court

Employment and Labour Relations Court

Case number

Appeal E283 of 2024

Judge

["M Mbarũ"]

The application failed because the appellants did not demonstrate good cause to justify non-compliance with the appeal rules, had not properly secured the record of appeal within the rule-based timelines or obtained leave, and their reliance on technical difficulties did not cure the prolonged procedural default; reinstatement would serve no useful purpose.

Source excerpt

• Review of dismissal order
• Reinstatement of appeal
• Want of prosecution
• Time limits for filing record of appeal
• Compliance with court rules
• Technological difficulty in virtual hearing

Mussukuya v Musoi & 3 others

Mussukuya v Musoi & 3 others (Environment and Planning Civil Case E019 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 5287 (KLR) (14 August 2026) (Ruling)

Court

Environment and Land Court

Case number

Environment and Planning Civil Case E019 of 2025

Judge

["JG Kemei"]

The court held that the applicant demonstrated a prima facie case and irreparable harm from the respondent’s ongoing commercial activity in a residential setting, including noise, blocked access, wastewater discharge, and interference with quiet enjoyment; the balance of convenience also favoured interim restraint. However, no special circumstances were shown to justify a mandatory injunction at interlocutory stage or orders compelling the regulatory respondents, because those prayers would prematurely determine disputed facts before trial.

Source excerpt

• Temporary injunction
• Mandatory injunction at interlocutory stage
• Change of user
• Residential versus commercial use
• Noise nuisance
• Wastewater discharge

Oyuchi v Magut

Oyuchi v Magut (Commercial Case E731 of 2026) [2026] SCC 209 (KLR) (14 August 2026) (Judgment)

Court

Small Claims Court

Case number

Commercial Case E731 of 2026

Judge

["ME Aligula"]

The Court found that the evidence was insufficient to establish which party breached the lease agreements, so the double-refund clause and the full claim of Kshs.400,000 could not be enforced. However, the Respondent expressly admitted that Kshs.150,000 remained outstanding and payable, and that admitted sum was therefore recoverable by the Claimant. The claim for expected profits failed because it was unsupported by any proof.

Source excerpt

• Lease agreement breach
• Refund of consideration
• Double-refund clause
• Burden of proof
• Special damages/loss of profits
• Costs and interest

Miano v Njombai & 3 others

Miano v Njombai & 3 others (Commercial Case E063 of 2025) [2026] KEHC 12976 (KLR) (Commercial and Tax) (13 August 2026) (Ruling)

Court

High Court

Case number

Commercial Case E063 of 2025

Judge

["PM Mulwa"]

The Applicant established a prima facie case because the resignation and share transfer documents contained material inconsistencies, including conflicting resignation dates, identical signatures, incorrect address details, and unexplained email and phone changes that raised serious questions about authenticity and procedural regularity. The court accepted that irreparable harm and balance of convenience favored preserving the company’s assets and shareholding pending trial, but declined to wholly freeze the company bank account because that would amount to finally determining management righ…

Source excerpt

• Temporary injunction
• Shareholding dispute
• Director removal
• Forgery allegations
• Register of members
• Company records

Gulf African Bank v Halgan Megabids Limited & 7 others

Gulf African Bank v Halgan Megabids Limited & 7 others (Commercial Case E135 of 2022) [2026] KEHC 12929 (KLR) (Commercial and Tax) (13 August 2026) (Judgment)

Court

High Court

Case number

Commercial Case E135 of 2022

Judge

["PM Mulwa"]

The Plaintiff acted in good faith on official land records issued and maintained by the 6th and 7th Defendants, and the register contained errors that caused it loss when the charged properties could not be realized. That loss is compensable by statutory indemnity under section 81 of the Land Registration Act. However, there was no evidence that State officers knowingly participated in the fraud or acted with malice or oppression, so punitive and exemplary damages were not warranted.

Source excerpt

• Tawarruq facility
• Charge over land
• Indemnity under land registration act
• Torrens system
• Fraudulent title
• Exemplary damages

In re Estate of Mwakunyua alias Suleimani (Deceased)

In re Estate of Mwakunyua alias Suleimani (Deceased) (Succession Cause E133 of 2026) [2026] KEKC 12 (KLR) (13 August 2026) (Judgment)

Court

Kadhis Courts

Case number

Succession Cause E133 of 2026

Judge

["HS Vumbi"]

The court found that the deceased’s estate included an undivided half share in KWALE/NG’OMBENI/1693, that the named children were the rightful heirs, and that because the heirs agreed, the estate could be distributed in equal shares notwithstanding the default Quranic ratio. The court therefore ordered vesting and rectification of the title accordingly.

Source excerpt

• Intestate succession
• Identification of estate property
• Heirs and shares under quran 4:11
• Co-owned land in estate
• Rectification of land title

In re MIOO aka MOO

In re MIOO aka MOO (Miscellaneous Application E129 of 2026) [2026] KEHC 12842 (KLR) (13 August 2026) (Ruling)

Court

High Court

Case number

Miscellaneous Application E129 of 2026

Judge

["A Mabeya"]

[2026] KEHC 12842 (KLR)

Source excerpt

Mwangi t/a Raydon Mwangi & Associates Advocates v Njenga

Mwangi t/a Raydon Mwangi & Associates Advocates v Njenga (Miscellaneous Application E025 of 2024) [2026] KEHC 13078 (KLR) (13 August 2026) (Ruling)

Court

High Court

Case number

Miscellaneous Application E025 of 2024

Judge

["JK Sergon"]

The Applicant complied with Rule 11 by filing a timely notice of objection and request for reasons, but the taxing officer failed to furnish reasons and improperly allowed a certificate of costs to issue while the objection remained pending. The taxing ruling also contained errors of principle, including reliance on irrelevant matters, failure to account for the limited scope of instructions, use of the wrong Schedule 10 basis, and failure to address the disputed instruction note and fee agreement. The certificate and taxation were therefore set aside and the bill was remitted for fresh taxat…

Source excerpt

• Rule 11 reference
• Premature issue of certificate of costs
• Failure to furnish reasons by taxing officer
• Error of principle in taxation
• Instruction fees
• Agreement on fees

Kamau v Director of Public Prosecutions & another

Kamau v Director of Public Prosecutions & another (Petition E020 of 2026) [2026] KEHC 12861 (KLR) (13 August 2026) (Ruling)

Court

High Court

Case number

Petition E020 of 2026

Judge

["JK Sergon"]

The Applicant failed to meet the threshold for conservatory relief because he did not establish a prima facie case, irreparable harm, or nugatoriness, and he did not show bad faith, malice, or abuse of prosecutorial power. The dispute, though commercial in context, raised a triable question on fraudulent intent that belongs in the criminal process, not constitutional interim relief.

Source excerpt

• Conservatory orders
• Prosecutorial discretion
• Abuse of criminal process
• Prima facie case
• False pretenses
• Commercial dispute masquerading as criminal case