Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Kenya decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The High Court increased general damages for serious facial and orbital injuries from Kshs. 800,000 to Kshs. 2,000,000, while affirming liability and special damages.
The High Court allowed amendments to the succession petition, corrected the beneficiary and asset schedule, and issued an amended certificate of confirmation of grant.
The tribunal allowed an application to amend pleadings, finding the changes necessary to reflect current parties, deductions, and issues without shown prejudice.
Manyala & 3 others (Suing as Members of Kibuye Market Traders) v City Manager, County Government of Kenya & 4 others (Petition E002 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 5327 (KLR) (21 August 2026) (Ruling)
The consent of 31 July 2025 compromised only the two interlocutory applications, not the substantive petition, so the court was not functus officio in relation to the petition. The proposed amendment was allowed in principle because it was connected to the original dispute and could be answered by the Respondents, but leave was limited because the proposed pleading lacked particulars required for a proper constitutional claim. Costs were awarded against the Petitioners because the application was necessary due to their incomplete pleading.
Source excerpt
Omuhaka v Muraguri (Employment and Labour Relations Appeal E314 of 2025) [2026] KEELRC 2420 (KLR) (20 August 2026) (Judgment)
The appeal succeeded because the proposed amendments did not introduce a wholly new dispute; they only particularized claims already pleaded in the original statement of claim, and allowing them caused no prejudice that could not be cured by response. The trial court therefore erred in treating the application as time-barred and in refusing leave to amend, so the ruling was set aside and substituted with an order granting the amendment.
Source excerpt
Omar (Suing on Behalf of the Estate of H.E. Keneth Mwakombo Kamto) v County Government of Kilifi (Cause E016 of 2025) [2026] KEELRC 2387 (KLR) (14 August 2026) (Ruling)
The court held that the respondent had shown a sufficient basis to amend its response because the additional records were material to the dispute over alleged house allowance arrears and could assist the court in determining the real issues on merit. Since the cause of action remained distinct and the proceedings would be unnecessary if the claim had already been settled in the earlier constitutional litigation, the summons against the respondent's officers were lifted, but the amendment was conditioned on strict compliance with filing timelines.
Source excerpt
Thuku (Suing as the Legal Representative of the Estate of James Wachira Muthae - Deceased) v Wachira & 8 others (Environment and Land Case E041 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 5334 (KLR) (12 August 2026) (Ruling)
Because the suit included multiple defendants and only the 1st, 3rd and 9th defendants were shown to have died before filing, the entire suit was not void. The correct remedy was to strike out the names of those deceased defendants rather than amend the plaint to substitute or sanitise the pleadings.
Source excerpt
Wanjiru (Suing in his Capacity as the Personal Representaive of the Estate of Harrison Waweru Kimengere - Deceased) v Wachira & 2 others (Environment and Land Case E335 of 2021) [2026] KEELC 5142 (KLR) (6 August 2026) (Ruling)
The court held that although post-judgment change of advocate was procedurally permissible and leave was granted, the applicant failed to demonstrate any legal basis for review, setting aside, or reopening of the case because the alleged documents were within her and her counsel’s custody, there was no satisfactory proof of new and important evidence or error apparent on the record, and the application was in substance an attempt to re-litigate the matter.
Source excerpt
Maestro Credit Management Limited & 2 others v Kawangware Cinema Limited & 6 others (Environment and Land Case 85 of 2020) [2026] KEELC 5083 (KLR) (4 August 2026) (Ruling)
The court held that the Nairobi City County Government and the Principal Secretary, State Department for Industrialization were necessary parties because the county holds land-use and planning records relevant to the suit and the industrialization department holds records on jua kali workspace development and occupation. However, leave to amend the defence was refused because no draft amended defence was annexed, so the court could not assess the proposed amendments. The stay prayer was overtaken by events.
Source excerpt
Westmont Holdings Sdn.Bhd v Central Bank of Kenya (Civil Appeal 37 of 2017) [2026] KECA 1541 (KLR) (31 July 2026) (Judgment)
Westmont had been wound up and therefore lacked capacity to prosecute the suit; Lynwood’s attempted introduction without leave was irregular and could not cure that defect. The Court’s earlier reinstatement order authorized amendment, not substitution. On the merits, the appellants failed to prove any stakeholder or trust arrangement or any legal basis for restitution, while the evidence showed the Kshs.185,500,000 was part payment toward CBK’s charge debt and lawfully appropriated. CBK’s counterclaim was also unproved. The appeal failed entirely.
Source excerpt
Explore more
