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 held that an NSSF benefits dispute had to go to the statutory retirement benefits mechanism under section 53. The appeal succeeded and the lower judgment was set aside.
On first appeal, the High Court upheld a conviction for defilement of an 8-year-old child and the mandatory life sentence under Section 8(2) of the Sexual Offences Act, finding age, penetration and identification proved.
The High Court dismissed an appeal against convictions for dealing in and possessing elephant tusks, holding the prosecution proved the Wildlife Act offences.
The High Court allowed the appeal by Car & General, finding the logbook presumption of ownership rebuts by evidence of prior sale and no basis for vicarious liability.
Ngamsap v Republic (Criminal Appeal E022 of 2026) [2026] KEHC 13085 (KLR) (25 August 2026) (Judgment)
The prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the recovered substance was cocaine and that the appellant knowingly possessed and trafficked it, because the suitcase was linked to him by its tag and contents, the cocaine was concealed in a false bottom, and the CCTV, immigration and WhatsApp evidence corroborated possession and knowledge. The conviction was upheld, but the sentence was reduced because the original term was lawful yet manifestly excessive for a first offender, given the need for proportionality.
Source excerpt
Bernard v Mbithi (Family Appeal E008 of 2025) [2026] KEHC 12917 (KLR) (19 August 2026) (Judgment)
The appeal failed because the appellant herself put distribution in issue, the evidence supported the finding that the deceased had settled the two houses in separate properties at Lukenya-Mavoko and Masii-Vyulya, and the trial court was entitled to adopt those factual circumstances in determining equitable distribution. The challenge to pecuniary jurisdiction was rejected because it was not raised in the lower court. The sale of Mavoko Town Block 3/2779 was upheld as family-authorized and used to facilitate subdivision of the estate.
Source excerpt
Mujukane v Rana Auto Selection Ltd & another (Civil Appeal E005 of 2025) [2026] KEHC 12899 (KLR) (19 August 2026) (Judgment)
The appellate court found that the 1st respondent had rebutted the statutory presumption of ownership by proving the vehicle had been sold to the 2nd respondent, making the 2nd respondent the beneficial and possessory owner at the material time. On liability, the evidence from the two drivers was mutually conflicting and there was no independent evidence to place blame wholly on one driver, so the proper course was equal apportionment. The 1st respondent therefore escaped vicarious liability, while the 2nd respondent remained vicariously liable for the acts of the driver handling the vehicle…
Source excerpt
Odundo v Republic (Criminal Appeal E037 of 2026) [2026] KEHC 13060 (KLR) (18 August 2026) (Judgment)
The appellant was lawfully convicted because the evidence showed that he was entrusted with the motor vehicle for a limited purpose, but instead converted it to his own use by using it as security for a loan without the owner's authority, which satisfied the elements of stealing a motor vehicle under sections 268(1) and 278A of the Penal Code. However, the appellate court found that, given the appellant's age, medical condition, first-offender status, and pre-sentence report, justice required substitution of the custodial sentence with probation.
Source excerpt
Philip v City Loaf Limited (Appeal E014 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 5266 (KLR) (7 August 2026) (Judgment)
The appeal failed because the appellant’s own evidence showed that he refused the reassigned duties, left work on 1 July 2022, and did not respond to the notice to show cause. The contract allowed reassignment of duties, so the respondent was entitled to allocate alternative work. The court held that the respondent did not unlawfully compel labour and that the appellant effectively deserted duty. The trial magistrate properly dismissed the claim and the counterclaim was not contested on appeal, so the judgment was affirmed.
Source excerpt
Mwangi v King’ori (Environment and Land Appeal 38 of 2024) [2026] KEHC 12914 (KLR) (5 August 2026) (Judgment)
The magistrate court had territorial competence because the Land Control Board consent was issued in Nyeri and the record showed the land was in Nyeri County; in any event, lack of territorial jurisdiction was not a basis to strike out the suit. The prayer for specific performance was sufficiently certain because it arose from the sale agreement, which obliged the vendor to deliver completion documents for transfer, and the agreement was valid, fully paid, and supported by Land Control Board consent. The appeal succeeded.
Source excerpt
Explore more
