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
Hombe v Njau [2025] KEHC 10703 (KLR)
The High Court at Nyeri held it lacked jurisdiction over a land-occupation dispute and directed that the file be transferred to the Environment and Land Court.
Fidelity Shield Insurance Co. Ltd v Musoni Microfinance Limited [2025] KEHC 10636 (KLR)
The High Court at Thika dismissed an application to stay proceedings pending appeal, finding no sufficient cause to halt the trial court’s assessment of losses.
In re Estate of Jedidah Wanjiru Karau (Deceased0 [2025] KEHC 10581 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant failed to demonstrate any actual or apparent bias on the part of the presiding judge or any prejudice that would result from determining the applications through written submissions. The directions given by the court were procedural and within judicial discretion, and the applicant had the opportunity to seek leave to file supplementary affidavits if necessary. The previous directions by another judge were persuasive but not binding. The applicant's dissatisfaction with the court's chosen procedure did not amount to evidence of bias or unfairness. Furthermor…
Source excerpt
Bedford v Mukangi & 8 others [2025] KEELC 5347 (KLR)
The court dismissed an application to consolidate an environment and land appeal with other matters, finding no material evidence of similar issues and noting Order 11 did not apply to appeals.
Gendron (Representing Hislaine Therese Gontier as Guardian Ad Litem) v Miradi Ujenzi Consultancy Limited [2025] KECA 1340 (KLR)
The Court of Appeal declined to certify an interlocutory application urgent, holding that no exceptional grounds were shown and the issues could await the normal hearing.
Ongalo v Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission & 3 others [2025] KEHC 10165 (KLR)
The court found that while the applicant had made requests for documents from NMK and Standard Chartered Bank, not all conditions for production had been met by the applicant, such as clarifying specific issues or obtaining necessary consents. NMK could not be faulted entirely for non-production, as some documents required further action by the applicant. However, the court recognized the applicant's right to access documents central to his defence and ordered NMK and the relevant banks to supply specified documents within 30 days. The court declined to grant a stay of proceedings, holding th…
Source excerpt
Thuo & 2 others (Acting through their Mother & Guardian - Susan Wanjiru Thuo) v Ngeta & another [2025] KECA 1291 (KLR)
The Court of Appeal dismissed an application to stay succession proceedings pending appeal, holding the applicants had not met the rule 5(2)(b) test.
Muraya & 2 others v Muraya & another [2025] KECA 1222 (KLR)
The Court of Appeal held that the applicants failed to satisfy the two-limb test for stay of proceedings under Rule 5(2)(b) of the Court of Appeal Rules, 2022. While the applicants raised an arguable ground regarding the inclusion of certain beneficiaries, they did not demonstrate that the appeal would be rendered nugatory if the stay was not granted. The Court emphasized that apprehension or fear of potential distribution to disputed beneficiaries does not meet the threshold for stay, as any prejudice could be remedied by costs or subsequent orders if the appeal succeeds. The Court reiterate…
Source excerpt
Kivumbu (Suing as the Administrator of the Estate of Kivumbu Ndiwa - Deceased) v Mwau [2025] KEELC 5154 (KLR)
The Environment and Land Court granted stay of execution and stay of proceedings pending appeal, finding the delay explained and the risk of substantial loss shown.
Mahir Properties Limited v Raas Global Limited & 3 others [2025] KEELC 5138 (KLR)
The court found that although the joint venture agreement contained a valid arbitration clause, the 1st defendant/applicant failed to bring the application for stay of proceedings and referral to arbitration promptly as required by Section 6 of the Arbitration Act. The applicant had already participated in the proceedings by filing responses and had not sought referral to arbitration at the earliest opportunity. The delay in making the application indicated acquiescence to the court's jurisdiction. Consequently, the court held that the application was an afterthought and that the requirements…
Source excerpt
Explore more
