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
Uap Insurance Company Limited v Malonza [2025] KEHC 9953 (KLR)
The High Court held that a Narok accident supplied territorial jurisdiction under section 15 of the Civil Procedure Act, set aside the striking out, and reinstated the suit.
Herber Investment Limited & another v Ouko & 3 others [2025] KEELC 4964 (KLR)
The court found that the Plaintiffs' application for leave to amend the plaint was merited because the proposed amendments sought to address new facts—specifically, the registration of two Certificates of title in the names of the 1st and 2nd Defendants during the pendency of the suit, which the Plaintiffs only became aware of after service of the Defendants' supplementary documents. The court held that the amendments did not introduce a new cause of action but arose from the same or substantially the same facts as the original claim. The court further determined that the suit was not statute…
Source excerpt
County Government of Nandi v Morong & another [2025] KEELC 5007 (KLR)
The court found that it has jurisdiction to determine whether the sale agreement offends statutes and public policy on procurement and disposal of assets by the plaintiff. The 1st defendant admitted entering the sale agreement, receiving consideration, and allowing possession and development of the land. The court held that the 1st defendant did not plead lack of cause of action or abuse of process in her defence, nor did she offer to refund the consideration or take steps to rescind the contract before filing the application. The court emphasized that striking out a suit is a drastic remedy…
Source excerpt
Mweu v Daystar Multipurpose Co-operative Society Limited [2025] KEELC 4736 (KLR)
The court found that the parties and subject matter in the present suit are identical to those in Machakos ELC Suit No. 174 of 2018, which was previously determined and dismissed with costs. The doctrine of res judicata, as codified in Section 7 of the Civil Procedure Act and expounded in relevant case law, bars the court from entertaining a suit where the issues have already been adjudicated between the same parties. The court emphasized that litigation must come to an end and that the appropriate remedy for the plaintiff, if dissatisfied with the earlier decision, was to file an appeal rath…
Source excerpt
Sakwa & 3 others v County Government of Vihiga & 3 others [2025] KEELC 4560 (KLR)
The Environment and Land Court dismissed an appeal challenging the striking out of Kenya Roads Board as a defendant, finding no cause of action against it.
Eldorado Gardens Limited v Thuranira & another [2025] KEHC 8742 (KLR)
The court found that the pleadings did not establish a cause of action against the 2nd Defendant, as there was no evidence of a contractual relationship or guarantee executed by him in favour of the Plaintiff. The alleged guarantee was disputed, and a forensic expert had determined that the signature was not his. Furthermore, the Plaintiff had not issued any demand to the 2nd Defendant, and liability of the principal debtor (the 1st Defendant) had not yet been established. The court held that pursuing a claim against a purported guarantor before establishing the principal debtor's liability i…
Source excerpt
Kitumbi (Suing on Behalf of the Estate of the Late Kitumbi Nzavyu) v Mbukoni Holdings Company Limited & 3 others [2025] KEELC 4244 (KLR)
The court found that the preliminary objection raised by the 3rd and 4th defendants did not meet the legal threshold established in Mukisa Biscuit Manufacturing Co. Ltd vs. West End Distributors. The objection raised matters of fact, such as whether particulars of fraud had been proved against the 3rd defendant, which require evidence and cannot be determined as pure points of law. The 3rd and 4th defendants had filed defences denying the allegations, indicating that the facts are contested and must be established through evidence. Therefore, the preliminary objection could not be sustained a…
Source excerpt
Juliet Theuri t/a J.M Theuri Associates v Susan Kahoya t/a Susan Kahoya & Company Advocates [2025] KEHC 6194 (KLR)
The High Court declined to strike out a commercial suit over an alleged breach of professional undertaking, finding the pleadings raised triable issues and a reasonable cause of action.
Gichuhi v Tropikal Brands (Africa) Ltd & another [2025] KEELRC 1210 (KLR)
The court allowed the claimant to file further documents, declined to strike out the second respondent, and reopened the claimant’s case for further evidence.
Gachoni Enterprises Ltd v Nyaga & 4 others [2025] KEELC 2999 (KLR)
A suit that has abated under Order 5 Rule 1(6) of the Civil Procedure Rules for failure to collect and serve summons can be followed by a fresh suit on the same subject matter, provided the claim is not time-barred, because the abatement does not constitute a determination on the merits of the case that would invoke the doctrine of res judicata, and denying the filing of a fresh suit would infringe upon a party's constitutional right to a fair hearing.
Source excerpt
Explore more
