Esheria Kenya Case Law
Sign in
Kenya Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

Kenya Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
4 court collections
Last checked

Search and filter Kenya case law

Results update automatically as you type.

Kenya decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Civil procedure [2026] KEHC 12813 (KLR)

Kilonzi & another (Suing as the Personal Representatives and Legal Admiminstrator to the Estate of the Late Augustine Mulela Munyilu) v Irungu & another (Suing as the Personal Representatives and Legal Administrator to the Estate of the Late Zachary Mbogo Maina) & another

Kilonzi & another (Suing as the Personal Representatives and Legal Admiminstrator to the Estate of the Late Augustine Mulela Munyilu) v Irungu & another (Suing as the Personal Representatives and Legal Administrator to the Estate of the Late Zachary Mbogo Maina) & another (Civil Appeal (Application) E101 of 2023) [2026] KEHC 12813 (KLR) (6 August 2026) (Ruling)

Court
High Court
Case number
Civil Appeal (Application) E101 of 2023
Judge
["WN Molonko"]

The applicants failed to demonstrate the due diligence they took to obtain the police and ODPP documents at trial, and because the documents were held by a public institution and were critical to the case, they could have been discovered with reasonable diligence; therefore the threshold for admitting additional evidence was not met and the motion failed.

Source excerpt

  • Additional evidence on appeal
  • Leave to adduce documentary evidence
  • Due diligence
  • Res judicata
  • Police investigation records
  • Order 42 rule 27-29 civil procedure rules
Read case analysis
Civil procedure [2026] KEELC 5138 (KLR)

Laly v Magnate Ventures Limited

Laly v Magnate Ventures Limited (Environment and Land Case 682 of 2014) [2026] KEELC 5138 (KLR) (31 July 2026) (Ruling)

Court
Environment and Land Court
Case number
Environment and Land Case 682 of 2014
Judge
["TW Murigi"]

The application failed because the defendant did not show due diligence sufficient to justify review. The relied-upon Gazette Notice predated the suit by years, was publicly available, and on its face revoked Block 93/1427, not the suit property Nairobi/Block 93/1429. A later judgment or its reasoning cannot found review, and the alleged new material did not undermine the basis of the original judgment.

Source excerpt

  • Review of judgment
  • New and important evidence
  • Due diligence
  • Trespass
  • Restitution
  • Gazette notice
Read case analysis
Family law [2026] KEHC 11949 (KLR)

Nganga v Kinyua

Nganga v Kinyua (Matrimonial Case E007 of 2024) [2026] KEHC 11949 (KLR) (30 July 2026) (Ruling)

Court
High Court
Case number
Matrimonial Case E007 of 2024
Judge
["LN Mugambi"]

The applicant failed the required threshold because the evidence was not new, was always within his possession or reach, could have been obtained and filed earlier with due diligence, and appeared intended to fill gaps after the respondent testified. Since the respondent’s case was not yet closed but the material was nevertheless available throughout, the court found no sufficient basis to depart from orderly pre-trial disclosure and refused to reward late tactical supplementation.

Source excerpt

  • Matrimonial property division
  • Additional evidence after commencement of hearing
  • Reopening of case
  • Due diligence
  • Prejudice and fair hearing
  • Trial management
Read case analysis
Civil procedure [2026] KEHC 12612 (KLR)

Buruchara v Muusan Trading Ltd & another

Buruchara v Muusan Trading Ltd & another (Civil Appeal E351 of 2024) [2026] KEHC 12612 (KLR) (Civ) (30 July 2026) (Ruling)

Court
High Court
Case number
Civil Appeal E351 of 2024
Judge
["WA Okwany"]

The Applicant failed to meet the statutory threshold for review because the alleged evidence on ownership of the motor vehicle was always within its knowledge and could have been produced earlier with due diligence. The application was therefore an impermissible attempt to re-open and re-argue issues of ownership and liability, which is a matter for appeal, not review.

Source excerpt

  • Review of judgment
  • New and important evidence
  • Due diligence
  • Error apparent on the face of the record
  • Motor vehicle ownership and liability
  • Stay of execution
Read case analysis
Civil procedure [2026] KEELC 5044 (KLR)

Muchilwa v Mathonye & another (Land Case Appeal E017 of 2026)

Muchilwa v Mathonye & another (Land Case Appeal E017 of 2026) [2026] KEELC 5044 (KLR) (30 July 2026) (Ruling)

Court
Environment and Land Court
Case number
Land Case Appeal E017 of 2026
Judge
["CC Oluoch"]

The Court held that although the death certificate might have some evidential relevance, admitting it on appeal would fundamentally alter the nature and basis of the dispute, destroy the Applicant’s own title via the nemo dat principle, and amount to impermissibly making a fresh case on appeal. The proper forum for such new evidence was the trial court through review, not the appellate court.

Source excerpt

  • Admission of additional evidence on appeal
  • Due diligence
  • Fraud and root of title
  • Review versus appeal
  • Fair trial and prejudice
Read case analysis
Civil procedure [2026] KEELC 5118 (KLR)

Wafula v Kassim & another

Wafula v Kassim & another (Environment and Land Case 62 of 2019) [2026] KEELC 5118 (KLR) (22 July 2026) (Ruling)

Court
Environment and Land Court
Case number
Environment and Land Case 62 of 2019
Judge
["A Nyukuri"]

The applicant did not satisfy the threshold for review because the alleged evidence was within his knowledge at trial, his failure to produce it arose from ignorance and lack of diligence rather than discovery of new evidence, and the application was filed after inordinate delay; review cannot be used to reopen a concluded case or fill evidentiary gaps.

Source excerpt

  • Review of judgment
  • Additional evidence after judgment
  • Functus officio
  • Inordinate delay
  • Due diligence
  • Ignorance of the law
Read case analysis
Civil procedure [2026] KECA 1332 (KLR)

Wachira & another (administrators of the Estate of Julius Wachira - Deceased) v Muburi (legal representative and administrator of the Estate of Mathew Muburi Muya - Deceased)

Wachira & another (administrators of the Estate of Julius Wachira - Deceased) v Muburi (legal representative and administrator of the Estate of Mathew Muburi Muya - Deceased) (Civil Appeal (Application) E124 of 2021) [2026] KECA 1332 (KLR) (3 July 2026) (Ruling)

Court
Court of Appeal
Case number
Civil Appeal (Application) E124 of 2021
Judge
["S ole Kantai", "JW Lessit", "A Ali-Aroni"]

The applicants failed to meet the threshold for admission of additional evidence. They gave only bare assertions, no concrete explanation of due diligence, no satisfactory reason why the witnesses were not called at trial despite being relatives and neighbours, and no cogent justification for the inordinate delay. The proposed evidence therefore appeared aimed at filling gaps and advancing a new case, not serving the interests of justice.

Source excerpt

  • Additional evidence on appeal
  • Scope of appellate discretion
  • Due diligence
  • Prejudice and proportionality
  • Ancestral land and lineage dispute
Read case analysis
Civil procedure [2026] KEMC 226 (KLR)

Kerubo (Suing as legal representatives of the estate of John Ariemba (deceased)) v Onchweri & another

Kerubo (Suing as legal representatives of the estate of John Ariemba (deceased)) v Onchweri & another (Civil Case E238 of 2023) [2026] KEMC 226 (KLR) (3 July 2026) (Ruling)

Court
Magistrate's Court
Case number
Civil Case E238 of 2023
Judge
["EM Mutuku"]

The applicant admitted the existence and prior knowledge of the evidence it sought to rely on, and its failure to file it earlier was due to counsel’s selective filing and lack of due diligence. That is not new and important evidence and does not amount to an error apparent on the face of the record or any sufficient reason. The review threshold was not met, so the application failed.

Source excerpt

  • Review of ruling
  • Order 45 rule 1 cpr
  • Section 80 civil procedure act
  • New and important evidence
  • Due diligence
  • Error apparent on the face of the record
Read case analysis
Civil procedure [2026] KEHC 8665 (KLR)

Bell Estate Agency Ltd v Owino Kojo & Company Advocates

Bell Estate Agency Ltd v Owino Kojo & Company Advocates (Miscellaneous Cause E374 of 2022) [2026] KEHC 8665 (KLR) (Commercial and Tax) (19 June 2026) (Ruling)

Court
High Court
Case number
Miscellaneous Cause E374 of 2022
Judge
["JWW Mong'are"]

The Applicant satisfied the threshold for review because it discovered material evidence after taxation showing that the Respondent’s principal was a public officer, a fact that was not reasonably discoverable earlier and which went to the legal capacity to file and prosecute the bill of costs. Since the Respondent failed to place a proper denial before the court, the allegations stood unchallenged and the taxation proceedings were treated as a nullity.

Source excerpt

  • Review of taxation ruling
  • New and important evidence
  • Public officer acting as advocate
  • Capacity to file advocate-client bill of costs
  • Nullity of proceedings
  • Due diligence
Read case analysis
Succession law [2026] KEHC 9619 (KLR)

In re Estate of Reith Alias Josef Konrad Beith (Deceased)

In re Estate of Reith Alias Josef Konrad Beith (Deceased) (Probate & Administration E025 of 2024) [2026] KEHC 9619 (KLR) (18 June 2026) (Ruling)

Court
High Court
Case number
Probate & Administration E025 of 2024
Judge
["JM Omido"]

The Objectors failed to demonstrate discovery of new and important evidence unavailable despite due diligence, and the transfer of lease did not clearly establish tenancy in common or displace the earlier finding on joint tenancy; therefore no sufficient reason existed to review the prior ruling and the motion was dismissed.

Source excerpt

  • Review of judgment/ruling
  • New and important evidence
  • Due diligence
  • Tenancy in common versus joint tenancy
  • Revocation of grant
  • Costs
Read case analysis

About this LexChat collection

Kenya decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.

Source links and collection timestamps are retained alongside the indexed records.