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
Abdalla & another v Seyoum [2025] KEHC 2020 (KLR)
The High Court partly allowed an appeal over vehicle clearance and demurrage, finding an agency relationship and lien issues but rejecting joint liability for all defendants.
Commissioner of Domestic Taxes v Oceanfreight East Africa Limited [2024] KEHC 7851 (KLR)
The court held that the obligation to withhold and remit withholding tax on demurrage charges collected on behalf of a non-resident principal rests with the agent who receives and remits the payments, not with the importers or consignees who make the payments. This is because the statutory framework, including Rule 4(1) of the Income Tax (Withholding Tax) Rules, 2001 and Section 35(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, imposes the withholding obligation on any person making a payment of, or on account of, income subject to withholding tax, which includes agents acting for non-resident principals. The…
Source excerpt
Commissioner of Domestic Taxes v Gulf Badr Group (Kenya) Limited [2024] KEHC 6277 (KLR)
The High Court dismissed a tax appeal over withholding tax on demurrage charges, holding that no tax could be imposed before express statutory provision and upholding the Tribunal.
Commissioner of Domestic Taxes v Gulf Badr Group (Kenya) Limited [2024] KEHC 4819 (KLR)
High Court allowed the Commissioner’s tax appeal, holding that demurrage charges collected by the shipping agent were subject to withholding tax and that the Tribunal erred in law.
Gapco Kenya Limited v Commissioner of Domestic Taxes [2023] KETAT 984 (KLR)
The Tribunal found that for periods before 1st July 2018, the Income Tax Act did not expressly provide for demurrage charges as taxable income for non-residents, and thus the Respondent's assessments for those periods were not justified. For the period from 1st July 2018 to 6th November 2019, the law expressly included demurrage charges as income deemed to accrue in or derived from Kenya and subject to withholding tax at 20% for non-residents. However, the Appellant failed to provide sufficient evidence to invoke the Kenya-France Double Taxation Agreement, specifically proof of TOM's tax resi…
Source excerpt
Maersk Kenya Limited v Multiplan Packaging Limited [2023] KEHC 2412 (KLR)
The High Court refused to stay lower court proceedings pending appeal, holding that the appellant had not shown special circumstances despite raising a jurisdictional challenge.
Autoxpress Limited v Commissioner Customs and Border Control [2023] KEHC 1460 (KLR)
The court held that the issue of demurrage charges does not fall within the jurisdiction of the Tax Appeals Tribunal because demurrage arises from a contractual relationship between the importer and the shipping company, not from any tax law or tax decision as defined under the Tax Procedures Act. The respondent's letter rejecting the refund application for demurrage was not a tax decision or assessment, and therefore not an appealable decision under the relevant statutes. The Tribunal was correct in declining jurisdiction over the demurrage claim, and the appeal was dismissed for lack of mer…
Source excerpt
Mustafa Mohamed Issa v Gateway Marine Services Limited [2019] KEHC 7027 (KLR)
High Court held the plaintiff breached an equipment hire agreement by failing to return a genset on time. Demurrage of USD 18,700 was awarded to the defendant.
Oceanfreight (E.A) Limited v Commissoner of Domestic Taxes [2018] KEHC 3337 (KLR)
The court held that while Rule 15 of the Tax Appeals Tribunal Rules and Order 42 Rule 27 of the Civil Procedure Rules provide for the possibility of admitting additional evidence at the appellate stage, such discretion is to be exercised sparingly and only in exceptional circumstances. The Supreme Court has set out strict criteria for the admission of additional evidence, including relevance, necessity, and the inability to present such evidence at the trial stage despite due diligence. In this case, the appellant failed to explain why the evidence of Mr. Kisuu was not presented before the Tr…
Source excerpt
Mohamed Saleh & Company v Kenya Revenue Authority [2018] KEHC 8038 (KLR)
The court found that the plaintiff had proved, on a balance of probabilities, that it incurred and paid storage charges in the sum of Kshs.5,936,880 to Habo Agencies Ltd as a direct result of the defendant's wrongful detention of its sugar consignment, contrary to the court order in JR No. 643 of 2003. The evidence, including debit notes and receipts, established that the payments were for storage, not handling, charges. The defendant's argument that the charges were not its responsibility or that the plaintiff failed to mitigate losses by paying self-assessed duty was rejected, as the court…
Source excerpt
Explore more
