Kenya Case Law

Hart v Schenker Ltd

Hart v Schenker Ltd (Employment and Labour Relations Cause 4 of 2019) [2026] KEELRC 2374 (KLR) (10 August 2026) (Judgment)

Court

Employment and Labour Relations Court

Case number

Employment and Labour Relations Cause 4 of 2019

Judge

["K Ocharo"]

The claimant proved a sustained course of conduct by the respondent—public humiliation, unilateral and unexplained alteration of reporting lines, an unfair final warning without a hearing, repeated silence to her complaints, and refusal of a visa support letter—that objectively destroyed mutual trust and confidence and made continued employment intolerable. Her evidence was credible, documentary, and sufficient despite the respondent’s failure to call witnesses. The respondent’s counterclaim failed because it was unproved and, independently, time-barred. Accordingly, the claimant was construc…

Source excerpt

• Constructive dismissal
• Unfair termination
• Burden of proof
• Admissibility of electronic evidence
• Counterclaim limitation
• Certificate of service

Republic v Mbunga

Republic v Mbunga (Criminal Case E141 of 2026) [2026] KEMC 442 (KLR) (10 August 2026) (Judgment)

Court

Magistrate's Court

Case number

Criminal Case E141 of 2026

Judge

["AK Njeru"]

The prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused was found shortly after the theft in possession of three KPLC meters, one of which was positively identified by the complainant as stolen property. The accused gave only a bare denial and failed to offer any credible explanation for his possession. The doctrine of recent possession therefore applied, and the court inferred guilty knowledge and dishonesty under section 169(1)(c) of the Energy Act.

Source excerpt

• Handling stolen energy equipment
• Recent possession doctrine
• Proof of possession
• Identification of stolen property
• Mens rea
• Evaluation of defence evidence

Republic v Auma & another

Republic v Auma & another (Criminal Case E391 of 2024) [2026] KEMC 443 (KLR) (10 August 2026) (Judgment)

Court

Magistrate's Court

Case number

Criminal Case E391 of 2024

Judge

["AK Njeru"]

The court held that the 1st accused’s silence left a strong prosecution case on count 1 unrebutted, and the consistent evidence of recovery, inventory, and chemical analysis established possession of bhang beyond reasonable doubt against her. Count 2 failed because the alcoholic drink exhibit suffered a broken chain of custody and evidential mismatch between the alleged 2 litres and the 500ml bottle produced. The 2nd accused was acquitted on both counts because the defence evidence, supported by DW2 and unshaken in cross-examination, created reasonable doubt as to his involvement or possessio…

Source excerpt

• Possession of narcotic drugs
• Possession of alcoholic drinks without authorization
• Chain of custody
• Constructive possession
• Burden and standard of proof
• Reasonable doubt

Khalalio General Trading Company v Kenya Revenue Authority

Khalalio General Trading Company v Kenya Revenue Authority (Tax Appeal E080 of 2026) [2026] KETAT 303 (KLR) (10 August 2026) (Judgment)

Court

Tax Appeal Tribunal

Case number

Tax Appeal E080 of 2026

Judge

["RO Oluoch", "AM Diriye", "E Komolo"]

The Appellant produced no documentary evidence before the Tribunal to prove that it was a commission agent or to show that it had supported its objection with relevant records. Because the taxpayer bears the initial burden of proof and the Respondent's assessment carries a presumption of correctness until displaced by credible evidence, the Tribunal found the additional assessments justified and upheld the objection decision.

Source excerpt

• Income tax assessments
• Value added tax assessments
• Burden of proof in tax appeals
• Banking analysis
• Objection decision
• Agency relationship evidence

Ria v Trinity Ace Logistics Ltd

Ria v Trinity Ace Logistics Ltd (Civil Suit E242 of 2025) [2026] KEMC 439 (KLR) (10 August 2026) (Judgment)

Court

Magistrate's Court

Case number

Civil Suit E242 of 2025

Judge

["GM Mokua"]

The plaintiff proved that the defendant’s driver caused the collision by failing to maintain a safe distance and striking the vehicle from behind. The defendant did not rebut the police abstract or pursue third-party proceedings against the other driver, and no contributory negligence was shown against the plaintiff passenger. The plaintiff also strictly proved special damages. General damages of Kshs. 250,000 were reasonable for the soft tissue injuries proved.

Source excerpt

• Negligence
• Vicarious liability
• Burden of proof
• Quantum of damages
• Special damages
• Costs

Family Bank Ltd v Gachege & another

Family Bank Ltd v Gachege & another (Civil Appeal E283 of 2025) [2026] KEHC 13073 (KLR) (10 August 2026) (Ruling)

Court

High Court

Case number

Civil Appeal E283 of 2025

Judge

["PN Gichohi"]

The court held that the central issue was locus standi of the 1st Respondent as a co-administratrix suing in the presence of another co-administrator, and that the matter was arguable. On the court’s reading of Order 24 Rule 5 and Order 43 Rule 1, leave to appeal was not required in the circumstances. To preserve the subject matter and allow the appeal to be tested properly, further proceedings in the subordinate court were stayed pending determination of the appeal.

Source excerpt

• Stay of proceedings pending appeal
• Locus standi of co-administrators
• Leave to appeal
• Preliminary objection
• Estate litigation
• Joint administration of estate

Owiso & 2 others v Attorney-General & another

Owiso & 2 others v Attorney-General & another (Petition E023 of 2025) [2026] KEHC 12762 (KLR) (Constitutional and Human Rights) (7 August 2026) (Judgment)

Court

High Court

Case number

Petition E023 of 2025

Judge

["M Thande"]

The High Court had jurisdiction and the petition was justiciable because it raised a real threatened constitutional violation in the public interest. On the merits, the Court held that Article 136(2)(a), read with Article 259(5)(c), fixes the next presidential election on the second Tuesday in August 2026, being 11 August 2026 as stated in the judgment, and that Article 142(1) does not confer a guaranteed five-year presidential term; the President’s term ends when the next President sworn under Article 136(2)(a) is sworn in. The Court granted declaratory reliefs, suspended the effect of inval…

Source excerpt

• Interpretation of articles 136(2)(a) and 142(1) of the constitution
• Computation of electoral timelines under article 259(5)(c)
• Justiciability and threatened contravention of the constitution
• Jurisdiction of the high court versus supreme court advisory opinion
• Validity and timing of presidential elections
• Independence and mandate of iebc

Kimani v Inspector General of Police & 3 others

Kimani v Inspector General of Police & 3 others (Constitutional Petition E049 of 2024) [2026] KEHC 12735 (KLR) (7 August 2026) (Judgment)

Court

High Court

Case number

Constitutional Petition E049 of 2024

Judge

["J Ngaah"]

The petition failed because the material before the court did not conclusively show a mere civil dispute; instead, the prosecution’s evidence was capable of proving that the petitioner obtained money by false pretences and diverted it. The disputed facts on payment source, contractual performance, and alleged diversion required trial evidence and cross-examination, not constitutional intervention. The criminal case was therefore not demonstrated to be an abuse of process, and the rights claims and derivative reliefs collapsed with it.

Source excerpt

• Abuse of process
• Stopping prosecution
• False pretences
• Civil dispute versus criminal offence
• Director of public prosecutions discretion
• Right to protection of the law

Gichiu v Abyssinia Iron Steel Mills Limited (Appeal E031 of 2025)

Gichiu v Abyssinia Iron Steel Mills Limited (Appeal E031 of 2025) [2026] KEELRC 2379 (KLR) (7 August 2026) (Judgment)

Court

Employment and Labour Relations Court

Case number

Appeal E031 of 2025

Judge

["M Mbarũ"]

The appellate court found that the trial court erred by focusing narrowly on formal employment records and failing to determine the substance of the work injury claim. On the evidence, the appellant’s presence and injury on the shop floor were accepted, and the respondent failed to rebut the claim by producing the relevant records. The respondent breached its duty to provide reasonable workplace safety, but the appellant also failed to take due care for his own safety. Liability was therefore apportioned equally at 50:50, and the trial court’s damages assessment of Ksh. 300,000 was upheld sub…

Source excerpt

• Employment relationship proof
• Work injury liability
• Duty of care in the workplace
• Apportionment of liability
• Quantum of damages for dental injury
• Work records under section 10 of the employment act

Gichohi v Gikandi (As administrator of the estate of Johnstone Gikandi) & another

Court

County Physical and Land Use Planning Liaison Committees

Case number

Complaint E001 of 2026

Judge

["R Monda"]

The Committee set aside a change-of-user approval for Plot No. Nairobi Block 104/233 after finding the county acted before the notice period expired and ignored a timely objection.

• Public participation
• Change of user approval
• Statutory notice compliance
• Neighbouring land impact
• County planning process
• Appeal to liaison committee