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
2 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
Defamation law [2026] KEHC 12970 (KLR)

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
Read case analysis
Civil procedure [2026] KEHC 13122 (KLR)

Linturi v M'Ethingia

Linturi v M'Ethingia (Civil Suit E005 of 2026) [2026] KEHC 13122 (KLR) (18 August 2026) (Ruling)

Court
High Court
Case number
Civil Suit E005 of 2026
Judge
["HM Nyaga"]

The court held that it could not conclusively determine at the interlocutory stage whether the impugned political statements were manifestly defamatory or were political rhetoric requiring full trial interrogation, and therefore the applicant had not established a clear prima facie case; further, any proven reputational injury could be compensated by damages and the balance of convenience favored declining a blanket gag order that would improperly restrict political campaigning and expression.

Source excerpt

  • Temporary injunction
  • Prima facie case
  • Irreparable harm
  • Balance of convenience
  • Political speech
  • Freedom of expression
Read case analysis
Civil procedure [2026] KEHC 12877 (KLR)

Kenya Ports Authority v Oruko & another

Kenya Ports Authority v Oruko & another (Civil Appeal E050 of 2025) [2026] KEHC 12877 (KLR) (14 August 2026) (Judgment)

Court
High Court
Case number
Civil Appeal E050 of 2025
Judge
["J Ngaah"]

The appellant was not proved to have prosecuted the respondent, procured the charge, or acted with malice. The evidence showed only that it reported a genuine suspected theft at its premises, after which police independently decided whom to arrest and charge. Because the first, third, and fourth elements of malicious prosecution were not proved against the appellant, liability could not attach to it, and the trial court’s judgment had no legal basis as against the appellant.

Source excerpt

  • Elements of malicious prosecution
  • Reasonable and probable cause
  • Malice
  • Role of complainant versus prosecutor
  • Independent prosecutorial discretion
  • Standard of proof on first appeal
Read case analysis
Civil procedure [2026] KEHC 12450 (KLR)

Nabwera v Savula

Nabwera v Savula (Civil Case E007 of 2026) [2026] KEHC 12450 (KLR) (Civ) (30 July 2026) (Ruling)

Court
High Court
Case number
Civil Case E007 of 2026
Judge
["KL Kandet"]

The Court held that the Plaintiff established a prima facie defamation case warranting only a limited preservatory injunction restraining repetition or republication of the specific HIV/AIDS allegation and substantially similar allegations linking the Plaintiff's alleged medical status or appearance to school failure; however, the Court refused to grant a mandatory apology, retraction, or interim damages because those remedies would finally determine liability and quantum before trial.

Source excerpt

  • Interlocutory injunction
  • Mandatory injunction
  • Temporary prohibitory injunction
  • Publication and defamatory meaning
  • Malice
  • Freedom of expression versus reputation
Read case analysis
Tort law [2026] KEHC 11163 (KLR)

Warutere v Attorney General & another

Warutere v Attorney General & another (Civil Case 544 of 2012) [2026] KEHC 11163 (KLR) (Civ) (22 July 2026) (Judgment)

Court
High Court
Case number
Civil Case 544 of 2012
Judge
["JN Mulwa"]

The Plaintiff failed to prove, on a balance of probabilities, that the Defendants maliciously prosecuted her. The evidence showed that the Bank made a complaint after discovering suspicious transactions and the police acted on that complaint. The Court found reasonable and probable cause existed for the arrest and charge, and no independent evidence of malice, spite, collusion, or improper motive was proved against either Defendant. The suit therefore failed in its entirety.

Source excerpt

  • Malicious prosecution
  • Burden of proof
  • Reasonable and probable cause
  • Malice
  • Acquittal in criminal proceedings
  • Damages
Read case analysis
Defamation [2026] KEHC 11199 (KLR)

Issack v Issack

Issack v Issack (Civil Appeal E011 of 2025) [2026] KEHC 11199 (KLR) (15 July 2026) (Judgment)

Court
High Court
Case number
Civil Appeal E011 of 2025
Judge
["FR Olel"]

The appellate court held that the appellant admitted posting the impugned words in WhatsApp groups shared with the respondent, so publication was proved. The words 'fake nurse with a fake degree' were objectively defamatory and, given the tagging of the respondent, the absence of any other identified nurse, and the surrounding context, they referred to him. The respondent’s evidence and PW2’s corroboration established that he was a registered nurse, while the appellant produced no proof to justify the allegation, so falsity stood proved. The appellant’s deliberate and unsupported publication,…

Source excerpt

  • Publication
  • Reference to plaintiff
  • Falsity
  • Malice
  • General damages
  • Injunction
Read case analysis
Torts [2026] KEMC 299 (KLR)

Mbogori & another v Attorney General & 3 others

Mbogori & another v Attorney General & 3 others (Civil Case E053 of 2023) [2026] KEMC 299 (KLR) (13 July 2026) (Judgment)

Court
Magistrate's Court
Case number
Civil Case E053 of 2023
Judge
["D Ngayo"]

The Plaintiffs proved that the criminal case ended in their favour, but they did not prove lack of reasonable and probable cause, malice, or any evidential link showing that the sued Defendants were legally responsible for the decision to prosecute. Their acquittal was insufficient by itself. The omission of the Director of Public Prosecutions was also significant because the complaint targeted the prosecutorial decision. The suit therefore failed.

Source excerpt

  • Malicious prosecution
  • False imprisonment
  • Burden of proof
  • Reasonable and probable cause
  • Malice
  • Acquittal and civil liability
Read case analysis
Civil procedure [2026] KEHC 10340 (KLR)

Vegpro Kenya Limited v Muringi & another

Vegpro Kenya Limited v Muringi & another (Civil Appeal E691 of 2024) [2026] KEHC 10340 (KLR) (Civ) (9 July 2026) (Judgment)

Court
High Court
Case number
Civil Appeal E691 of 2024
Judge
["D Mburu"]

The respondent failed to prove, on a balance of probabilities, the essential element of malice. The appellant’s complaint merely set the criminal process in motion and the police decision to investigate and charge was not shown to have been driven by spite, ill-will, or any improper purpose. The trial court misdirected itself by treating weak investigations and lack of linkage evidence as proof of malice. Without proof of malice, the claim for malicious prosecution could not stand.

Source excerpt

  • Malicious prosecution
  • Burden of proof
  • Reasonable and probable cause
  • Malice
  • Assessment of damages
  • First appellate review
Read case analysis
Civil procedure [2026] KEHC 10345 (KLR)

Ngure v Kenya Nut Company Ltd & another

Ngure v Kenya Nut Company Ltd & another (Civil Appeal E003 of 2025) [2026] KEHC 10345 (KLR) (Civ) (2 July 2026) (Judgment)

Court
High Court
Case number
Civil Appeal E003 of 2025
Judge
["D Mburu"]

The appellant proved only two elements of malicious prosecution: that the respondents initiated the criminal proceedings and that the case terminated in his favour. He did not prove absence of reasonable and probable cause or malice. The omission by the prosecution to call witnesses or produce documents supported acquittal, not a finding of malice. Because the tort requires all elements conjunctively, the claim failed.

Source excerpt

  • Malicious prosecution
  • Reasonable and probable cause
  • Malice
  • First appellate review
  • Acquittal under section 215 of the criminal procedure code
  • Burden of proof
Read case analysis
Tort law [2026] KEMC 237 (KLR)

Githinji v Kibor & 2 others

Githinji v Kibor & 2 others (Civil Suit E277 of 2021) [2026] KEMC 237 (KLR) (30 June 2026) (Judgment)

Court
Magistrate's Court
Case number
Civil Suit E277 of 2021
Judge
["VO Adet"]

The court found that the prosecution was instituted without probable cause and actuated by malice because the retrial judgment had found concealed material evidence, the charge of robbery with violence was maintained despite evidence pointing to theft, and no reasonable prosecutor could have believed the charge would likely succeed. The plaintiff proved damage through prolonged incarceration and related losses, warranting general and aggravated damages of Kshs. 4,000,000.

Source excerpt

  • Malicious prosecution
  • Arrest and detention
  • Probable cause
  • Malice
  • Damages
  • Wrongful conviction
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.