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
SWG v GGG & 3 others [2025] KEHC 10065 (KLR)
The High Court allowed joinder of two intended respondents in a matrimonial cause over disputed land, finding their presence necessary for a full determination of ownership.
Mbogoh v Chironda [2025] KECA 1098 (KLR)
The Court of Appeal dismissed an application for stay of proceedings, finding the intended appeal arguable but not shown to be nugatory if the trial court case continued.
Somoni v Muangi & another [2025] KEELC 4565 (KLR)
The court found that the dominant issue in the present suit is the determination of rights and interests in matrimonial property, specifically the ownership and alleged fraudulent acquisition of title to land acquired during the subsistence of marriage. The Family Division of the High Court, already seized of a pending suit involving the same parties and property, has both exclusive and incidental jurisdiction to determine all issues relating to matrimonial property, including allegations of fraud. The Environment and Land Court recognized that proceeding with the current suit risks conflicti…
Source excerpt
WW v JMM [2025] KEHC 7917 (KLR)
The court found that both parties have joint rights to the matrimonial home and that the applicant established a prima facie case for injunctive relief to prevent alienation of the property pending the determination of the main matrimonial cause. The evidence, including threats and intent to commercialize the property, justified the issuance of a temporary injunction. However, the court declined to grant exclusive occupation or contempt orders, noting that both parties currently share the house (on different floors) and that contempt was not sufficiently established. The status quo—joint occu…
Source excerpt
Gitau v Kanyua; Koigi (Interested Party) [2025] KEHC 6607 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant had demonstrated a sufficient interest in the contested property by producing a sale agreement with the plaintiff, which was not denied. The court noted that the applicant's stake in the property was material and that the consent judgment was adopted without disclosure of her interest. Applying the principles governing joinder of parties, the court held that the applicant should be given an opportunity to be heard to ensure all questions regarding the property are settled. The court allowed the application for joinder, granting the applicant leave to partici…
Source excerpt
Mmbeye v Mwangi & another [2025] KEELC 3918 (KLR)
The court found the co-ownership registration and resulting charge over Ngong/Ngong/30651 were fraudulently or invalidly procured, ordered rectification, and struck out the counterclaim.
CAO v AOM [2025] KEHC 5352 (KLR)
The court found that the Applicant had discovered new and important evidence after the previous ruling—specifically, that the Defendant had registered the disputed motor vehicle in his own name, a fact not disclosed to the court or the Applicant at the time of the earlier application. The Respondent's prior averments were found to be misleading and indicative of concealment of material facts. The court held that the Applicant could not have, with due diligence, discovered this information earlier, and that the Respondent's conduct justified review of the previous order. Applying the principle…
Source excerpt
Helmann v Mbogo & another [2025] KEELC 3458 (KLR)
The court found that the suit property is located in Meru County, and neither party resides in Mombasa. Under Section 12 of the Civil Procedure Act and relevant practice directions, suits concerning immovable property must be filed where the property is situated. The Environment and Land Court at Mombasa, while having original and unlimited jurisdiction, should not exercise jurisdiction in a manner that imposes unnecessary costs and inconvenience on parties, especially when a competent court exists in the locality of the property. The Defendants demonstrated that the balance of convenience, e…
Source excerpt
Simiyu v Waswa [2025] KEELC 3370 (KLR)
The appellate court found that while the appellant established ownership of the suit property through documentary evidence, the dispute fundamentally concerns matrimonial property, given the parties' marital relationship and the use of the property as a family home. The Environment and Land Court lacks jurisdiction to determine matrimonial property disputes, which should be adjudicated under the Matrimonial Property Act by the appropriate court. Furthermore, even if the appellant is the owner, the respondent cannot be evicted from the matrimonial home without a court order under Section 12(3)…
Source excerpt
SC alias SCK v MKC [2025] KEHC 4092 (KLR)
The court granted the temporary injunction because the Applicant established a prima facie case that the properties in question were matrimonial properties acquired through joint efforts during the marriage, and there was a threat of irreparable injury if the Respondent were allowed to dispose of them before the substantive suit on property division is heard, and the balance of convenience tilted in favor of preserving the properties.
Source excerpt
Explore more
