Kenya Case Law

Moindi t/a Moindi & Company Advocates v Sankeet

Moindi t/a Moindi & Company Advocates v Sankeet (Civil Case E3387 of 1000) [2026] KEHC 12970 (KLR) (19 August 2026) (Judgment)

Court

High Court

Case number

Civil Case E3387 of 1000

Judge

["LA Mumassabba"]

The Defendant’s WhatsApp message was proved to have been published to a third party, it plainly referred to the Plaintiff, and its allegations of dishonesty, corruption, criminality and professional incompetence were defamatory and malicious. Given the Plaintiff’s standing as an Advocate and the limited but serious publication, the Court awarded Kshs.1,200,000 in general damages and Kshs.300,000 in aggravated damages, ordered a written apology and retraction, but declined exemplary damages and a broad injunction.

Source excerpt

• Libel
• Publication by whatsapp
• Malice
• General damages
• Aggravated damages
• Exemplary damages

Angwenyi v Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission & another

Angwenyi v Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission & another (Civil Case E100 of 2022) [2026] KEHC 8598 (KLR) (Civ) (18 June 2026) (Judgment)

Court

High Court

Case number

Civil Case E100 of 2022

Judge

["JN Mulwa"]

The 2nd Defendant’s article of 2 June 2022 falsely presented the Plaintiff as accused of fraudulent land acquisition and implied criminality, which was defamatory and published without verification, comment, or correction. The 1st Defendant was not liable because the suit targeted the 2 June 2022 article, not the report addressed to IEBC, and no cause of action was properly sustained against it. The 2nd Defendant’s defences of truth, qualified privilege, and fair comment failed because the publication was factually inaccurate and reckless. The Plaintiff was therefore entitled to general damag…

Source excerpt

• Libel
• Qualified privilege
• Truth/justification
• Fair comment
• Malice
• Damages

Kamau v Mathiu & another

Kamau v Mathiu & another (Civil Case 446 of 2015) [2026] KEHC 7789 (KLR) (Civ) (4 June 2026) (Judgment)

Court

High Court

Case number

Civil Case 446 of 2015

Judge

["JN Mulwa"]

The Court held that the Defendants published a false and reckless article portraying the Plaintiff as suspended and under investigation over Integrity Centre without verifying the facts or contacting him, thereby defaming him. The Defendants failed to prove truth, fair comment, or qualified privilege because the publication was framed as factual, was unsupported by evidence, and breached journalistic accuracy obligations. The Plaintiff therefore succeeded in defamation, but only general damages were awarded because the injury was fully met by that award, while aggravated and exemplary damages…

Source excerpt

• Libel
• Truth as a defence
• Fair comment
• Qualified privilege
• Malice
• Damages

Nation Media Group Limited & another v Mandevia

Nation Media Group Limited & another v Mandevia (Civil Appeal E896 of 2024) [2026] KEHC 7403 (KLR) (Civ) (29 May 2026) (Judgment)

Court

High Court

Case number

Civil Appeal E896 of 2024

Judge

["FR Olel"]

The Court held that the article complained of was a fair and accurate report of the pleadings in HCCC No 589 of 2015, a judicial proceeding, and therefore attracted absolute privilege under section 6 of the Defamation Act. Because the impugned publication faithfully reflected the pleaded allegations, the appellants were not required to independently verify or substantiate the pleaded material before publication. The trial court therefore erred in finding defamation and awarding damages. The appeal succeeded and the suit was dismissed with costs to the appellants.

Source excerpt

• Libel
• Absolute privilege
• Fair and accurate reporting of judicial proceedings
• Damages for defamation
• First appeal re-evaluation of evidence

Mungatana v Standard Limited

Mungatana v Standard Limited (Civil Case 1320 of 2005) [2026] KEHC 6928 (KLR) (Civ) (21 May 2026) (Judgment)

Court

High Court

Case number

Civil Case 1320 of 2005

Judge

["JN Mulwa"]

The publication, viewed as a whole and through the lens of the reasonable reader, did more than satirize politics. By naming the Plaintiff and using language and imagery that imputed association with a mafia-like political syndicate and dishonourable conduct, it crossed into defamatory publication. The Defendant failed to prove the factual basis necessary for fair comment, and no apology or retraction was made. The Court therefore found defamation proven and awarded modest compensatory and exemplary damages based on the Plaintiff’s public standing and the reach of the newspaper.

Source excerpt

• Libel
• Fair comment
• Public interest publication
• Malice
• Damages assessment
• Satirical cartoon

Bwire v Mbogo

Bwire v Mbogo (Civil Appeal E043 of 2025) [2026] KEHC 5487 (KLR) (29 April 2026) (Judgment)

Court

High Court

Case number

Civil Appeal E043 of 2025

The High Court allowed a defamation appeal, held a Facebook publication defamatory, rejected fair comment, and awarded damages and costs.

• Defamation
• Libel
• Fair comment
• Public interest
• Damages
• Malice

Nation Media Group Limited v Taib Ali Taib

Court

Court of Appeal

Case number

Civil Appeal 255 of 2019

Judge

["PO Kiage", "AO Muchelule", "WK Korir"]

The Court of Appeal upheld liability for libel over a newspaper article linking the respondent to drugs and illegal sugar imports, and increased general damages to Kshs. 10 million.

• Libel
• Qualified privilege
• Fair comment
• Malice
• Damages in defamation
• Aggravated damages

Paul K. Matumbi v Henry K. Tanui

Court

Court of Appeal

Case number

Civil Appeal 67 of 2020

Judge

["F Tuiyott", "AO Muchelule", "JM Ngugi"]

The Court of Appeal affirmed liability for defamation, reduced general damages from Kshs 6 million to Kshs 3 million, and set aside exemplary damages.

• Libel
• Qualified privilege
• Justification
• Malice
• General damages
• Exemplary damages

Kamau v Association of Action Aid International & 2 others

Court

Court of Appeal

Case number

Civil Appeal E009 of 2020

Judge

MA Warsame, JM Ngugi, GV Odunga

The Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal over confidentiality, defamation and injurious falsehood claims, holding the agreement did not extend beyond its written terms.

• Confidentiality clause
• Privity of contract
• Internal policy confidentiality
• Vicarious liability
• Authorisation/facilitation
• Libel

Munene v Gisesa & another

Court

Court of Appeal

Case number

Civil Appeal 369 of 2019

Judge

["W Karanja", "SG Kairu", "WK Korir"]

The Court of Appeal held that a newspaper article naming the appellant in connection with the Kwekwe Squad was defamatory, but awarded only nominal damages of Kshs. 200,000.

• Libel
• Fair comment
• Malice
• Publication
• Reputation of prisoners
• Damages for defamation