Kenya Case Law

Okelo (In his capacity as Legal Representative of Ochong Okelo - Deceased) v Aguka & 2 others; Karau & 14 others (Interested Parties)

Okelo (In his capacity as Legal Representative of Ochong Okelo - Deceased) v Aguka & 2 others; Karau & 14 others (Interested Parties) [2025] KEELC 5388 (KLR)

Court

Environment and Land Court

Case number

Environment and Land Case 48 of 2011

Judge

JO Mboya

The court dismissed an objection to an email and report, holding that the plaintiff could still comply with the electronic certificate requirement under Section 106B.

• Admissibility Of Evidence
• Electronic Evidence
• Documentary Evidence
• Production Of Documents
• Electronic-evidence
• Admissibility-of-documents

Ndwiga v Republic

Ndwiga v Republic [2025] KECA 1224 (KLR)

Court

Court of Appeal

Case number

Criminal Appeal 46 of 2015

Judges

S ole Kantai, JW Lessit, AO Muchelule

Second appeal in a robbery-with-violence case allowed after the Court of Appeal found dock identification unreliable, recent possession unsafe, and evidence inconsistent.

• Robbery With Violence
• Doctrine Of Recent Possession
• Identification Evidence
• Amendment Of Charge Sheet
• Electronic Evidence
• Burden Of Proof

Hezekiah v Standard Group Plc

Hezekiah v Standard Group Plc [2025] KEHC 9126 (KLR)

Court

High Court

Case number

Civil Appeal E261 of 2023

Judge

RC Rutto

The court found that the respondent's publication and broadcast of the appellant's photograph, associating him with judicial nominees rejected for integrity issues, was defamatory. The publication was widely disseminated and would likely lower the appellant's reputation in the eyes of reasonable members of society. The court held that the appellant was not required to call a character witness, as defamation is actionable per se once the elements are proved. The electronic evidence was properly admitted, as the certificate of electronic evidence was filed with leave of court and not objected t…

Source excerpt

• Defamation
• Libel
• Damages Assessment
• Media Law
• Electronic Evidence
• Apology And Retraction

Wambui v Standard Chartered Bank of Kenya Limited

Wambui v Standard Chartered Bank of Kenya Limited [2025] KEELRC 1495 (KLR)

Court

Employment and Labour Relations Court

Case number

Employment and Labour Relations Cause 383 of 2019

Judge

AN Mwaure

The court found the bank failed to prove valid grounds for summary dismissal and held the claimant was unfairly terminated, awarding notice pay, leave pay, and compensation.

• Unfair Termination
• Summary Dismissal
• Procedural Fairness
• Conflict Of Interest
• Burden Of Proof
• Electronic Evidence

Kenya National Private Security Workers Union v G4S Kenya Limited

Kenya National Private Security Workers Union v G4S Kenya Limited [2025] KEELRC 1433 (KLR)

Court

Employment and Labour Relations Court

Case number

Employment and Labour Relations Cause 587 of 2019

Judge

HS Wasilwa

The court upheld an objection to electronic documents tendered without a section 106B certificate and expunged the impugned material from the record.

• Admissibility Of Evidence
• Electronic Evidence
• Documentary Evidence
• Certificate Of Electronic Evidence
• Electronic-evidence
• Admissibility-of-evidence

Ouche v Weza Care Solutions

Ouche v Weza Care Solutions [2025] KEELRC 1435 (KLR)

Court

Employment and Labour Relations Court

Case number

Claim E086 of 2024

Judge

Nzioki wa Makau

The court struck out an investigation report on alleged sexual harassment for lack of the required electronic evidence certificate, and ordered the respondent to comply within one week.

• Admissibility Of Evidence
• Electronic Evidence
• Sexual Harassment Investigations
• Electronic-evidence
• Evidence-act
• Employment-law

Mtere v Republic

Mtere v Republic [2025] KEHC 5144 (KLR)

Court

High Court

Case number

Criminal Appeal E051 of 2024

Judge

AM Muteti

The court found that the identification of the appellant was fundamentally flawed. The victim, PW1, admitted she could not recognize her assailants at the time of the robbery, as they wore masks and the circumstances were not conducive to positive identification. The subsequent identification of the appellant from CCTV footage was inconsistent with her initial testimony and was not preceded by an identification parade, which was a fatal omission. Furthermore, the CCTV footage was admitted without the mandatory certificate under Sections 78 and 106B of the Evidence Act, rendering it inadmissib…

Source excerpt

• Robbery With Violence
• Identification Evidence
• Electronic Evidence
• Fair Trial Rights

Republic v Wainaina

Republic v Wainaina [2025] KEMC 54 (KLR)

Court

Magistrate's Court

Case number

Criminal Case E2985 of 2022

Judge

PA Ndege

The court convicted the accused on CCTV and circumstantial evidence for breaking into Nest Pub, but discharged him after treating remand time as sufficient punishment.

• Breaking And Entering
• Circumstantial Evidence
• Electronic Evidence
• Standard Of Proof
• Admissibility Of Cctv
• Sentencing Guidelines

Githonga v Republic

Githonga v Republic [2025] KEHC 4248 (KLR)

Court

High Court

Case number

Criminal Appeal E140 of 2022

Judge

CJ Kendagor

The conviction for possession of articles connected with the commission of a terrorist act was safe because the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant was in actual control and management of the premises where the articles were found, that the articles contained videos intended to instigate or facilitate terrorist acts, and that the appellant had knowledge of the contents based on the correlation with items found at his residence.

Source excerpt

• Terrorism Offences
• Possession Of Prohibited Articles
• Electronic Evidence
• Criminal Procedure
• Sentencing Principles

Ayora v United International States University -Africa

Ayora v United International States University -Africa [2025] KEELRC 1023 (KLR)

Court

Employment and Labour Relations Court

Case number

Cause E311 of 2020

Judge

JW Keli

The court found that the termination of the Claimant's employment was unlawful and unfair because the Respondent failed to prove a valid and fair reason for the termination, specifically the alleged act of soliciting a bribe, and failed to follow a fair procedure, evidenced by the lack of a proper investigation report, the manipulation of electronic evidence, and the denial of the Claimant's right to legal representation at the disciplinary hearing.

Source excerpt

• Unfair Termination
• Disciplinary Procedure
• Admissibility Of Evidence
• Electronic Evidence
• Right To Counsel
• Remedies For Wrongful Dismissal