id stringlengths 14 15 | text stringlengths 26 2.68k | source stringlengths 91 185 |
|---|---|---|
96d728cba368-0 | IN THE HIGH COURT AT NAIROBI
MILIMANI LAW COURTS
CIVIL DIVISION (APPELLATE SIDE)
CORAM: D. S. MAJANJA J.
CIVIL APPEAL NO. E137 OF 2023
CONSOLIDATED WITH
CIVIL APPEAL NO. E140 OF 2023
BETWEEN
DON PETER OTURY ….……………........................................................ APPELLANT
AND
DIRECTLINE ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMI... | Otury_v_Directline_Assurance_Company_Limited_(Civil_Appeal_E137 & E140 of 2023_(Consolidated))_[2023] KEHC 25379 (KLR)_(Civ)_(17 November 2023)_(Judgment) |
96d728cba368-1 | In a Statement of Claim dated 28.10.2022, the Appellant stated that on 10.06.2022, the motor vehicle was involved in a road traffic accident along Muranga-Thika Road resulting in extensive damages to the motor vehicle. The scene of the accident was attended to by a police officer who supervised the towing of the motor ... | Otury_v_Directline_Assurance_Company_Limited_(Civil_Appeal_E137 & E140 of 2023_(Consolidated))_[2023] KEHC 25379 (KLR)_(Civ)_(17 November 2023)_(Judgment) |
96d728cba368-2 | The Respondent stated that it was an express term in the policy that the Appellant would lose any rights under the policy if it is found that the Appellant made a fraudulent claim or that the Appellant or any person acting on the Respondent’s behalf misrepresented facts or information relating to a claim. That the Resp... | Otury_v_Directline_Assurance_Company_Limited_(Civil_Appeal_E137 & E140 of 2023_(Consolidated))_[2023] KEHC 25379 (KLR)_(Civ)_(17 November 2023)_(Judgment) |
96d728cba368-3 | On the reliefs sought by the Appellant, the Adjudicator considered the assessment reports filed by both parties and concluded that it would not make any economic sense to repair the vehicle hence the Appellant was entitled to the pre-accident value of the motor vehicle less the salvage value. The Adjudicator arrived at... | Otury_v_Directline_Assurance_Company_Limited_(Civil_Appeal_E137 & E140 of 2023_(Consolidated))_[2023] KEHC 25379 (KLR)_(Civ)_(17 November 2023)_(Judgment) |
96d728cba368-4 | Analysis and Determination
The court’s jurisdiction in dealing with appeals from the Small Claims Court is limited by section 38(1) of the Small Claims Court Act, 2016 which provides that ‘A person aggrieved by the decision or an order of the Court may appeal against that decision or order to the High Court on matter... | Otury_v_Directline_Assurance_Company_Limited_(Civil_Appeal_E137 & E140 of 2023_(Consolidated))_[2023] KEHC 25379 (KLR)_(Civ)_(17 November 2023)_(Judgment) |
96d728cba368-5 | The Respondent relied on the said investigator’s report dated 12.08.2022 while the Appellant supported its case with 13 documents including a copy of the motor vehicle’s logbook, the policy document and schedule, Mpesa excerpts showing payment of the premium, the police abstract, the motor vehicle’s accident report and... | Otury_v_Directline_Assurance_Company_Limited_(Civil_Appeal_E137 & E140 of 2023_(Consolidated))_[2023] KEHC 25379 (KLR)_(Civ)_(17 November 2023)_(Judgment) |
96d728cba368-6 | As regards the Appellant’s case, the Adjudicator cited Virani t/a Kisumu Beach Resort v Phoenix of East Africa Assurance Company Ltd [2004] eKLR where the Court of Appeal held that a claim for special damages should not only be pleaded but strictly proved. The Appellant claimed assessed repair costs of the motor vehicl... | Otury_v_Directline_Assurance_Company_Limited_(Civil_Appeal_E137 & E140 of 2023_(Consolidated))_[2023] KEHC 25379 (KLR)_(Civ)_(17 November 2023)_(Judgment) |
96d728cba368-7 | On towing expenses, I agree with the Learned Adjudicator that even though the Appellant sought Kshs. 22,000.00, what was proved by way of an invoice endorsed with the word “paid” was Kshs. 6,000.00. I further agree that the Appellant proved the payment of Kshs. 5,000.00 for the assessment report by adducing a receipt f... | Otury_v_Directline_Assurance_Company_Limited_(Civil_Appeal_E137 & E140 of 2023_(Consolidated))_[2023] KEHC 25379 (KLR)_(Civ)_(17 November 2023)_(Judgment) |
96d728cba368-8 | Interest on the amount in (1) from the date of filing suit until paid in full
Each party shall bear its own costs.
DATED and DELIVERED at NAIROBI this 17th day of NOVEMBER 2023.
D. S. MAJANJA
JUDGE
Mr Mambiri instructed by Vusha, Onsembe and Mambiri Company Advocates for the Appellant
Mr Awino instructed by Cootow and... | Otury_v_Directline_Assurance_Company_Limited_(Civil_Appeal_E137 & E140 of 2023_(Consolidated))_[2023] KEHC 25379 (KLR)_(Civ)_(17 November 2023)_(Judgment) |
afd74ef06bb1-0 | REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT ELDORET
SUCCESSION CAUSE NO. 66 OF 2020
IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF JAN CHRIS ESSELINK
BILL ESSELINK………………………….1ST PETITIONER/ADMINISTRATOR
JACKLINE CHEMTAI JOHN………….2ND PETITIONER/ADMINISTRATOR
NICOLE HENDRICK JE ESSELINK…3RD PETITIONER/ADMINISTRATOR
Coram:■Before Jus... | In_re_Estate_of_Jan_Chris_Esselink_(Deceased)_(Succession_Cause_66 of 2020)_[2023] KEHC 25439 (KLR)_(20 November 2023)_(Judgment) |
afd74ef06bb1-1 | Motor Vehicle Registration No. KSD 139.
Shares at Kakuzi, Kapchorua Tea Kenya PLC, Sasin PLC, Williamson Tea Kenya PLC, NCBA Group PLC, Stanbic Holdings PLC, Cables Ltd, Kengen PLC, Kenya BOC Kenya Ltd BAT Ltd, Carbacid, C02 Ltd, EABL, Mumias Sugar Company Ltd, Unga Ltd, Safaricom Ltd.
This cause is non contentious as ... | In_re_Estate_of_Jan_Chris_Esselink_(Deceased)_(Succession_Cause_66 of 2020)_[2023] KEHC 25439 (KLR)_(20 November 2023)_(Judgment) |
afd74ef06bb1-2 | Further, as the withdrawal was instigated by one of the administrators, it is imperative that this court emphasize the duties of administrators as was set out in section 83 of the Law of Succession Act as follows;
83. Personal representatives shall have the following duties-
(a) to provide and pay, out of the estate o... | In_re_Estate_of_Jan_Chris_Esselink_(Deceased)_(Succession_Cause_66 of 2020)_[2023] KEHC 25439 (KLR)_(20 November 2023)_(Judgment) |
afd74ef06bb1-3 | In this cause there are three administrators and therefore, any decisions made with regards to the estate must have the input of all three administrators. It is apparent that the withdrawal of funds for the alleged purpose of defraying the expenses of the estate was at the instruction of one administrator and therefore... | In_re_Estate_of_Jan_Chris_Esselink_(Deceased)_(Succession_Cause_66 of 2020)_[2023] KEHC 25439 (KLR)_(20 November 2023)_(Judgment) |
233d13370baa-0 | REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT BUNGOMA
MISC APPLICATION NO. E109 OF 2018
MARTIN KHAEMBA WEKANYWA-------------------------------APPLICANT
VERSUS
WAMALWA SIMIYU & CO ADVOCATES-------------------RESPONDENT
RULING
The application before me is a notice of motion brought under certificate of urgency d... | Wekanywa_v_Wamalwa_Simiyu_&_Co_Advocates_(Miscellaneous_Application_E109 of 2018)_[2023] KEHC 25424 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Ruling) |
233d13370baa-1 | In their submissions dated 25th August,2023 the Respondent submitted that the orders as sought by the Applicants were against the court which is mandated to execute its decrees. Reliance was placed in the case of Michael Bartenge vs. Stephen Bartenge (2007) Eklr. Counsel submitted that the Applicant ought to have sough... | Wekanywa_v_Wamalwa_Simiyu_&_Co_Advocates_(Miscellaneous_Application_E109 of 2018)_[2023] KEHC 25424 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Ruling) |
233d13370baa-2 | “I am afraid the applicant did not seek any orders which may be granted. His only substantive prayer was for the grant of an interlocutory injunction pending the hearing and determination of this application. That order was granted at the time when the application was certified urgent. It was to be in force pending ... | Wekanywa_v_Wamalwa_Simiyu_&_Co_Advocates_(Miscellaneous_Application_E109 of 2018)_[2023] KEHC 25424 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Ruling) |
233d13370baa-3 | It is so ordered.
Dated and delivered at Bungoma this 17th day
Of November 2023
D.Kemei
Judge
In the presence of
No appearance Motanya Applicant
Onyando for Wamalwa Simiyu for Respondent
Kizito Court Assistant | Wekanywa_v_Wamalwa_Simiyu_&_Co_Advocates_(Miscellaneous_Application_E109 of 2018)_[2023] KEHC 25424 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Ruling) |
e3807440c46b-0 | REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE EMPLOYMENT AND LABOUR RELATIONS COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
CAUSE NO. 1596 OF 2018
ERICK OMERI EMIRA ■CLAIMANT
- VERSUS -
SECUREX AGENCIES (K) LTD ■………….RESPONDENT
(Before Hon. Justice Byram Ongaya on Friday 17th November, 2023)
JUDGMENT
The claimant filed the Memorandum of claim on 10.12.2018 t... | Emira_v_Securex_Agencies_(K)_Ltd_(Cause_1596 of 2018)_[2023] KEELRC 2940 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Judgment) |
e3807440c46b-1 | It is the claimant’s case that the respondent did not procedurally terminate his employment. Instead, it relied and focused on the allegations of theft, which allegations caused the claimant to be put in custody for some days, during which, he was alleged to have deserted duty and his services summarily terminated with... | Emira_v_Securex_Agencies_(K)_Ltd_(Cause_1596 of 2018)_[2023] KEELRC 2940 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Judgment) |
e3807440c46b-2 | The claimant and his colleague declined to write the resignation letters, and were informed to return to the respondent’s offices on 08.07.2015.
On 08.07.2015 the claimant returned to the respondent’s offices. Mr. Nderutu was not available and thus the meeting could not take place. The respondent’s secretary asked the... | Emira_v_Securex_Agencies_(K)_Ltd_(Cause_1596 of 2018)_[2023] KEELRC 2940 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Judgment) |
e3807440c46b-3 | The claimant did not show up for the disciplinary hearing on 02.07.2015 and no reason was given for the absence. The claimant having failed to appear for disciplinary proceedings and having been absent from duty without authority, the respondent summarily dismissed him.
The respondent stated that the claimant showed u... | Emira_v_Securex_Agencies_(K)_Ltd_(Cause_1596 of 2018)_[2023] KEELRC 2940 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Judgment) |
e3807440c46b-4 | The Court finds that the claimant’s account upon his own testimony is not challenged at all. It was for the respondent to show that on 02.07.2015 the claimant had failed to attend the disciplinary hearing as envisaged in section 43 of the Employment Act. If indeed the claimant had failed to do so, it is not clear why t... | Emira_v_Securex_Agencies_(K)_Ltd_(Cause_1596 of 2018)_[2023] KEELRC 2940 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Judgment) |
e3807440c46b-5 | The Court has considered the suffering the claimant went through for the manner he was dismissed and awarded 8 months’ salaries in compensation. The claimant has not shown justification for general damages for mental torture, stress and anguish as a separate heading for award. It is declined. There were no submissions ... | Emira_v_Securex_Agencies_(K)_Ltd_(Cause_1596 of 2018)_[2023] KEELRC 2940 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Judgment) |
c52e9f14d547-0 | REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE EMPLOYMENT AND LABOUR RELATIONS COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
PETITION NO. E70 OF 2023
(Formerly High Court Petition No. E87 OF 2023 at Milimani)
IN THE MATTER OF CONTRAVENTION OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS UNDER ARTICLE 2(1), 3(1), 10, 19, 20, 22, 23(3), 24,25, 29(D), 31,40,41,43, 47 AND 48 O... | Ondunga_v_Kenya_Defence_Forces_&_another_(Petition_E70 of 2023)_[2023] KEELRC 2952 (KLR)_(20 November 2023)_(Ruling) |
c52e9f14d547-1 | A declaration that the petitioner was maliciously prosecuted and damages for malicious prosecution are payable;
A declaration that the termination of the claimant’s contract of employment was, unlawful, unprocedural and unfair for want of a valid reason and damages for unfair termination of employment are payable
An o... | Ondunga_v_Kenya_Defence_Forces_&_another_(Petition_E70 of 2023)_[2023] KEELRC 2952 (KLR)_(20 November 2023)_(Ruling) |
c52e9f14d547-2 | The petitioner has since filed a notice of motion dated 07.07.2023 seeking the following orders;
That the applicant be granted leave to amend its petition as set out in the draft amended petitioner/applicant annexed thereto.
That the draft amended petition attached to the application be deemed as duly filed and serve... | Ondunga_v_Kenya_Defence_Forces_&_another_(Petition_E70 of 2023)_[2023] KEELRC 2952 (KLR)_(20 November 2023)_(Ruling) |
fd5f76056bb2-0 | REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE EMPLOYMENT AND LABOUR RELATIONS COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
ELRC CAUSE NO. 1077 OF 2017
TITUS OMONDI WANYAMA■CLAIMANT
- VERSUS -
ARISTOCRATS CONCRETE LTD ■…………. RESPONDENT
(Before Hon. Justice Byram Ongaya on Friday 17th November, 2023)
JUDGMENT
The claimant filed the Statement of claim on 12.06... | Wanyama_v_Aristocrats_Concrete_Ltd_(Employment_and_Labour_Relations_Cause_1077 of 2017)_[2023] KEELRC 2945 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Judgment) |
fd5f76056bb2-1 | On the part of the respondent it was argued that the claimant’s letter of offer was a fixed term contract which was to subsist for 3 months each renewable over the period 11.11.2005 to 11.02.2016.
That there was no contract capable of enforcement in law existing as at 31.03.2015 between the claimant and the respondent... | Wanyama_v_Aristocrats_Concrete_Ltd_(Employment_and_Labour_Relations_Cause_1077 of 2017)_[2023] KEELRC 2945 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Judgment) |
fd5f76056bb2-2 | To answer the 1st issue the Court returns that parties were in initially in a fixed term contract for three months. The respondent alleges the contracts were renewed over the period of relationship. Further, the respondent alleges that the last of the three-months contracts was for the term ending 31.03.2015. However, ... | Wanyama_v_Aristocrats_Concrete_Ltd_(Employment_and_Labour_Relations_Cause_1077 of 2017)_[2023] KEELRC 2945 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Judgment) |
fd5f76056bb2-3 | To answer the 3rd issue, the Court finds that the termination was unfair. The respondent has offered no evidence to show that the claimant’s services were indeed not required and the reason has not been shown to have existed as at termination as envisaged in section 43 of the Act. The claimant’s submission is upheld. I... | Wanyama_v_Aristocrats_Concrete_Ltd_(Employment_and_Labour_Relations_Cause_1077 of 2017)_[2023] KEELRC 2945 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Judgment) |
d84f99db50f4-0 | REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT BUNGOMA
CIVIL APPEAL NO.71 OF 2023 ■
IMPACT FINANCE TRUST CDF BUMULA………..1ST APPELLANT/APPLICANT
BENARD ANALO MAKATIANI T/A
BENWEIL AUCTIONEERS ……………………….….2ND APPELLANT/APPLICANT
VERSUS
JUDITH MUKHWANA KOKONYA & ANOTHER .....................1ST RESPONDENT
BENSON SIMIY... | Impact_Finance_Trust_CDF_Bumula_&_another_v_Kokonya_&_another_&_another_(Civil_Appeal_71 of 2023)_[2023] KEHC 25413 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Ruling) |
d84f99db50f4-1 | The Respondents opposed the application vide a replying affidavit sworn by Benson Simiyu the 2nd respondent on his own behalf and that of the 1st Respondent sworn on 20/7/2023 wherein he averred inter alia; that the application is fatally incompetent, destitute of any merit and is otherwise an abuse of the due pro... | Impact_Finance_Trust_CDF_Bumula_&_another_v_Kokonya_&_another_&_another_(Civil_Appeal_71 of 2023)_[2023] KEHC 25413 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Ruling) |
d84f99db50f4-2 | of its discretion as required by the law; that the applicants have not offered any security for the due performance of the decree and costs that were assessed in the lower court matter plus interest as required by Order 42 Rule 6 (2) of the Civil Procedure Rules; that the application be dismissed with costs as the app... | Impact_Finance_Trust_CDF_Bumula_&_another_v_Kokonya_&_another_&_another_(Civil_Appeal_71 of 2023)_[2023] KEHC 25413 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Ruling) |
d84f99db50f4-3 | The application was canvassed by way of written submissions. The applicants filed their submissions dated 25th August 2023 while the respondents relied on their replying affidavit sworn on 20th day of July, 2023.
I have given due consideration to the rival affidavits and submissions. I find that the issue of for det... | Impact_Finance_Trust_CDF_Bumula_&_another_v_Kokonya_&_another_&_another_(Civil_Appeal_71 of 2023)_[2023] KEHC 25413 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Ruling) |
d84f99db50f4-4 | The Respondents have averred that they are persons of means and that they do farming and will be in a position to refund the decretal sums in the event of success of appeal. However, the Respondents did not go further by presenting evidence to the effect that indeed they are not persons of straw such as by availing ban... | Impact_Finance_Trust_CDF_Bumula_&_another_v_Kokonya_&_another_&_another_(Civil_Appeal_71 of 2023)_[2023] KEHC 25413 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Ruling) |
d84f99db50f4-5 | D.Kemei
Judge
In the presence of
Onyando For Wamalwa Simiyu For Appellants/Applicants
No appearance Milimo for Respondents
Kizito Court Assistant. | Impact_Finance_Trust_CDF_Bumula_&_another_v_Kokonya_&_another_&_another_(Civil_Appeal_71 of 2023)_[2023] KEHC 25413 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Ruling) |
c80b259dd67b-0 | REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE EMPLOYMENT AND LABOUR RELATIONS COURT OF KENYA AT MACHAKOS
ELRC CAUSE NO. E001 OF 2021
DAVID INYANI■CLAIMANT
- VERSUS -
PROMASIDOR KENYA LIMITED■………. RESPONDENT
(Before Hon. Justice Byram Ongaya on Friday 17th November, 2023)
JUDGMENT
The claimant filed the statement of claim on 02.06.2021 th... | Inyani_v_Promasidor_Kenya_Limited_(Employment_and_Labour_Relations_Cause_E001 of 2021)_[2023] KEELRC 2948 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Judgment) |
c80b259dd67b-1 | The respondent be ordered to pay the costs of the claim and interest.
The Memorandum of defence was filed on 15.09.2021 through Ronn Law Advocates LLP. The respondent prayed that the suit be dismissed with costs.
The claimant’s case was that he was employed by the respondent as a supply chain manager vide a letter of... | Inyani_v_Promasidor_Kenya_Limited_(Employment_and_Labour_Relations_Cause_E001 of 2021)_[2023] KEELRC 2948 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Judgment) |
c80b259dd67b-2 | The claimant states that Inyani enterprises, allegedly owned by him is non-existent, and the same can be proved by conducting searches with the companies’ registry.
On the part of the respondents it is stated that the respondent received anonymous information about possible fraud in its operations, which allegedly inv... | Inyani_v_Promasidor_Kenya_Limited_(Employment_and_Labour_Relations_Cause_E001 of 2021)_[2023] KEELRC 2948 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Judgment) |
c80b259dd67b-3 | The claimant did not request for additional time to prepare his response, but responded through his letter of 27.03.2021. Upon receiving the response the respondent reviewed it and found it unsatisfactory and instead decided to convene a disciplinary hearing.
By a letter dated 30.03.2021 the respondent invited the cla... | Inyani_v_Promasidor_Kenya_Limited_(Employment_and_Labour_Relations_Cause_E001 of 2021)_[2023] KEELRC 2948 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Judgment) |
c80b259dd67b-4 | The 3rd issue is whether the termination was unfair. On procedure, the claimant was suspended by the letter dated 15.03.2021. While testifying that the suspension was imposed without prior warning and reasons disclosed, the letter refers to a meeting on 15.03.2021 between the claimant and the Group Chief Executive Offi... | Inyani_v_Promasidor_Kenya_Limited_(Employment_and_Labour_Relations_Cause_E001 of 2021)_[2023] KEELRC 2948 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Judgment) |
c80b259dd67b-5 | Breach of the respondent’s Code of Business Conduct and terms of employment by causing or abetting aiding and abetting the making of payments to supposed suppliers of the respondent for fictitious supplies hence loss of respondent’s funds. That included claimant’s approval of Local Purchase Orders (LPOs) for the suppos... | Inyani_v_Promasidor_Kenya_Limited_(Employment_and_Labour_Relations_Cause_E001 of 2021)_[2023] KEELRC 2948 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Judgment) |
c80b259dd67b-6 | The claimant replied the letter to show cause by his letter dated 26.03.2021. He denied making the LPOs; he denied knowing the mentioned suppliers subject of the LPOs allegations and finance director was answerable on how payments may have been effected; he had not received money from Patel Mondish in capacity as compa... | Inyani_v_Promasidor_Kenya_Limited_(Employment_and_Labour_Relations_Cause_E001 of 2021)_[2023] KEELRC 2948 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Judgment) |
c80b259dd67b-7 | For the reasons for termination the Court returns that the respondent has established that they were valid as per section 43 of the Employment Act and as well, they were fair per section 45 of the Act as they related to the respondent’s operational requirements and, the claimant’s compatibility and conduct. The claiman... | Inyani_v_Promasidor_Kenya_Limited_(Employment_and_Labour_Relations_Cause_E001 of 2021)_[2023] KEELRC 2948 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Judgment) |
2e32cd142759-0 | IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT KISUMU
(CORAM: OMONDI, JA, IN CHAMBERS)) CIVIL APPLICATION NO. E093 OF 2023 BETWEEN
RICHARD MAPESA MATULI■APPLICANT
AND
ADAM AMBANI MULANDA■RESPONDENT
(An application for extension of time to file Notice of Appeal out of time, and leave to file appeal out of time from the ruling of the Environ... | Matuli_v_Mulanda_(Civil_Application_E093 of 2023)_[2023] KECA 1367 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Ruling) |
6de4abbe4720-0 | REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE EMPLOYMENT AND LABOUR RELATIONS COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
MISCELLANEOUS CAUSE NO. E157 OF 2023
OLIVER THANDI MUNYUA ■APPLICANT
- VERSUS -
ABSA BANK KENYA PLC……………...………RESPONDENT
(Before Hon. Justice Byram Ongaya on Friday 17th November, 2023)
RULING
The applicant filed the application dated ... | Munyua_v_ABSA_Bank_Kenya_PLC_(Miscellaneous_Cause_E157 of 2023)_[2023] KEELRC 2941 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Ruling) |
6de4abbe4720-1 | Part III of the Limitation of Actions Act Cap 22 does not apply as to permit leave as prayed for to file the petition.
The petitioner has not advanced a good reason for not filing the petition or claim prior to lapsing of the time of limitation.
The application is unduly delayed filed 130 days after the decision in the... | Munyua_v_ABSA_Bank_Kenya_PLC_(Miscellaneous_Cause_E157 of 2023)_[2023] KEELRC 2941 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Ruling) |
6de4abbe4720-2 | The Court has considered all the circumstances including the acquittal in the criminal appeal and returns no orders on costs.
The application is hereby dismissed with no orders on costs.
Signed, dated and delivered by video-link and in court at Nairobi this Friday 17th November, 2023.
BYRAM ONGAYA
PRINCIPAL JUDGE | Munyua_v_ABSA_Bank_Kenya_PLC_(Miscellaneous_Cause_E157 of 2023)_[2023] KEELRC 2941 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Ruling) |
a7daf1a1d32a-0 | REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
CIVIL APPEAL NO. E278 OF 2021
GLAXO SMITHKLINE PHARMACEUTICAL
KENYA LIMITED …………...............................1ST APPELLANT
STELLA KIGUJA NG’ANGA……………………….. 2ND APPELLANT
-VERSUS-
JOSEPH MULINGE KILO ……………………..........RESPONDENT
(Being an appeal from the judgmen... | Glaxo_Smithkline_Pharmaceutical_Kenya_Limited_&_another_v_Kilo_(Civil_Appeal_E278 of 2021)_[2023] KEHC 25400 (KLR)_(Civ)_(17 November 2023)_(Judgment) |
a7daf1a1d32a-1 | That the learned magistrate erred in fact by failing to scrutinize/evaluate the evidence tendered in this matter and as a result held the appellants wholly liable for the accident
The learned magistrate erred in law and in fact by failing to scrutinize the evidence tendered in support of the injuries suffered by the re... | Glaxo_Smithkline_Pharmaceutical_Kenya_Limited_&_another_v_Kilo_(Civil_Appeal_E278 of 2021)_[2023] KEHC 25400 (KLR)_(Civ)_(17 November 2023)_(Judgment) |
a7daf1a1d32a-2 | The appellant argued that the respondent did not adduce any eye witness evidence to support his version of events from which he seeks the court to hold that the 2nd appellant is liable for the accident. he did not adduce any evidence proving that the 2nd appellant was driving the motor vehicle at an excessive speed and... | Glaxo_Smithkline_Pharmaceutical_Kenya_Limited_&_another_v_Kilo_(Civil_Appeal_E278 of 2021)_[2023] KEHC 25400 (KLR)_(Civ)_(17 November 2023)_(Judgment) |
a7daf1a1d32a-3 | This being a first appeal, the duty of the first appellate court is to re-evaluate the evidence adduced before the trial court and to arrive at its own conclusion whether to support the findings of the trial court while bearing in mind that the trial court had the opportunity of seeing the witnesses. In Selle –Vs- Asso... | Glaxo_Smithkline_Pharmaceutical_Kenya_Limited_&_another_v_Kilo_(Civil_Appeal_E278 of 2021)_[2023] KEHC 25400 (KLR)_(Civ)_(17 November 2023)_(Judgment) |
a7daf1a1d32a-4 | In the circumstances, I find that the court was not right on its findings on liability. I have re-evaluated the evidence and find that both were to blame for the accident and the court ought to have apportioned liability at 50:50%.
I accordingly set aside 80:20% ratio and substitute it with 50:50% liability for reasons... | Glaxo_Smithkline_Pharmaceutical_Kenya_Limited_&_another_v_Kilo_(Civil_Appeal_E278 of 2021)_[2023] KEHC 25400 (KLR)_(Civ)_(17 November 2023)_(Judgment) |
a7daf1a1d32a-5 | Since the appeal succeeded partially each party is to bear its own costs. Orders accordingly.
Dated, Signed and Delivered online via Microsoft Teams at Nairobi this 17th day of November, 2023.
………….…………….
N. ONGERI
JUDGE
In the presence of:■
……………………………. for the Appellant
……………………………. for the Respondent | Glaxo_Smithkline_Pharmaceutical_Kenya_Limited_&_another_v_Kilo_(Civil_Appeal_E278 of 2021)_[2023] KEHC 25400 (KLR)_(Civ)_(17 November 2023)_(Judgment) |
4ba15e8261a3-0 | REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE EMPLOYMENT AND LABOUR RELATIONS COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
CAUSE NO. 328 OF 2019
STEPHEN MOLLA ■CLAIMANT
- VERSUS -
KENYA WOMEN AND CHILDREN WELLNESS CENTRE ………………………………………1ST RESPONDENT
DELORIS JORDAN……………………….2ND RESPONDENT
(Before Hon. Justice Byram Ongaya on Friday 17th November, 2023)
JUDG... | Molla_v_Kenya_Women_and_Children_Wellness_Centre_&_another_(Cause_328 of 2019)_[2023] KEELRC 2934 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Judgment) |
4ba15e8261a3-1 | Costs of the suit.
Any other order the Court deems fit.
The respondent filed the statement of response on 06.02.2021 through Archer & Wilcock Advocates. The respondent admitted employing the claimant and as at termination the prevailing contract of service was the one dated 01.04.2018. and he served as a driver or Prog... | Molla_v_Kenya_Women_and_Children_Wellness_Centre_&_another_(Cause_328 of 2019)_[2023] KEELRC 2934 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Judgment) |
4ba15e8261a3-2 | The Court has considered the material evidence that a meeting was held following the theft and the 1st respondent concluded it had lost confidence in the claimant and terminated per termination clause. The Court considers that as urged for the respondents, the 1st respondent was entitled to invoke the contractual termi... | Molla_v_Kenya_Women_and_Children_Wellness_Centre_&_another_(Cause_328 of 2019)_[2023] KEELRC 2934 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Judgment) |
ecdafefeebcb-0 | REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
CIVIL CASE NO. 136 OF 2018
TATU CITY LIMITED.......................................1ST PLAINTIFF
KOFINAF COMPANY LIMITED………………….….2ND PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
STEPHEN MBUGUA MWAGIRU………..............1ST DEFENDANT
WINFRED WANJIKU GITONGA ……………….. 2ND DEFENDANT
GABRIEL KAGO... | Tatu_City_Limited_&_another_v_Mwagiru_&_5_others_(Civil_Case_136 of 2018)_[2023] KEHC 25354 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Ruling) |
ecdafefeebcb-1 | The plaintiffs’ allegations of harassments and malice are mere allegations as they are devoid of concise and specific particulars with respect to the 1st defendant and 2nde defendant.
The plaintiffs allegations are unrelated and are farfetched and thus cannot be linked to the alleged cause of defamation that the plaint... | Tatu_City_Limited_&_another_v_Mwagiru_&_5_others_(Civil_Case_136 of 2018)_[2023] KEHC 25354 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Ruling) |
ecdafefeebcb-2 | He averred that the articles that were complained about were facilitating and procured at the behest and instructions of the 1st defendant. The 1st defendant procured the 4th defendant to cover the story allegedly that the 1st and 2nd plaintiff were embroiled in a row with villagers over Tatu City Properties. This posi... | Tatu_City_Limited_&_another_v_Mwagiru_&_5_others_(Civil_Case_136 of 2018)_[2023] KEHC 25354 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Ruling) |
ecdafefeebcb-3 | The 1st defendant submitted the Plaint has not specifically disclosed how the alleged publications have undermined the reputation of the Plaintiffs in the eyes of the right-thinking members of the society. Having fallen short of this element, the Plaint does not sustain a defamation suit let alone against the 1st Defen... | Tatu_City_Limited_&_another_v_Mwagiru_&_5_others_(Civil_Case_136 of 2018)_[2023] KEHC 25354 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Ruling) |
ecdafefeebcb-4 | The plaintiffs submitted the application herein disregards Order 2, Rule 15 of the Civil Procedure Rules, the 1st Defendant's submissions contain material evidence which should not form the substance of an application for striking out. The Application filed by the 1st Defendant are mere side shows aimed at distracting ... | Tatu_City_Limited_&_another_v_Mwagiru_&_5_others_(Civil_Case_136 of 2018)_[2023] KEHC 25354 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Ruling) |
ecdafefeebcb-5 | The issues for determination in this application are as follows;
Whether this suit discloses a cause of action against the 1st and 2nd defendants.
Whether the plaintiff’s suit is statute time barred.
Whether the plaintiff’s suit against the 1st and 2nd defendants should be struck out.
On the issue as to whether the sui... | Tatu_City_Limited_&_another_v_Mwagiru_&_5_others_(Civil_Case_136 of 2018)_[2023] KEHC 25354 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Ruling) |
e4e7cccabf2e-0 | REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE EMPLOYMENT AND LABOUR RELATIONS COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
ELRC CAUSE NO. 1106 OF 2018
PITALIS MUSITIKHO ANDUKA■CLAIMANT
- VERSUS -
ROSOLO BUILDING CO. LIMITED ■………….RESPONDENT
(Before Hon. Justice Byram Ongaya on Friday 17th November, 2023)
JUDGMENT
The claimant filed the Statement of claim on... | Anduka_v_Rosolo_Building_Co._Limited_(Employment_and_Labour_Relations_Cause_1106 of 2018)_[2023] KEELRC 2944 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Judgment) |
e4e7cccabf2e-1 | On the part of the respondents it is stated that the claimant was never its employee, but was instead a causal labourer who would be occasionally called upon to work for it whenever need arose.
The respondent asserts that it was non-existent and had not been incorporated in the year 2000, and, that it only came into e... | Anduka_v_Rosolo_Building_Co._Limited_(Employment_and_Labour_Relations_Cause_1106 of 2018)_[2023] KEELRC 2944 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Judgment) |
e4e7cccabf2e-2 | A year’s salary compensation for unlawful termination Kshs.382, 554.00.
Gratuity for 16 years 5 months Kshs.210, 404.70.
Injury compensation paid by Monarch Insurance Kshs.859,200.00.
Unpaid NSSF for 17-years Kshs.400 x 198 months = Kshs.79, 200.00.
Unpaid NHIF for 17 years Kshs.173, 400.00.
Total claim Kshs.2, 769,237... | Anduka_v_Rosolo_Building_Co._Limited_(Employment_and_Labour_Relations_Cause_1106 of 2018)_[2023] KEELRC 2944 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Judgment) |
08b00e2328da-0 | REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
CIVIL CASE NO. 119 OF 2017
KAMAU THIONGO ………………………………………..… 1ST PLAINTIFF
WEDDY NJERI GITAU……………………………………… 2ND PLAINTIFF
FRESIAH MBUGUA …………………………………………. 3RD PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
MARY WAMBUI MBUGUA................. 1ST DEFENDANT/APPLICANT
JESSICA AKINYI ODHIAMBO……....... | Thiongo_&_2_others_v_Mbugua_&_2_others_(Civil_Case_119 of 2017)_[2023] KEHC 25356 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Ruling) |
08b00e2328da-1 | THAT such invasion is confrontational and is likely to cause mayhem and public disorder.
THAT unless properly interpreted such action might lead to bloodshed
The application is supported by the affidavit of MARY WAMBUI MBUGUA sworn on 17/4/2023 in which she deposed that being dissatisfied with the judgement and decree ... | Thiongo_&_2_others_v_Mbugua_&_2_others_(Civil_Case_119 of 2017)_[2023] KEHC 25356 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Ruling) |
08b00e2328da-2 | Having failed to convene a General Meeting as ordered by the court, the prerogative was bestowed on her to convene the General Meeting in accordance with the law. The Registrar of Societies, having been satisfied that the issuance of notices and documents was proper, issued a letter dated 16/5/2023 wherein she approved... | Thiongo_&_2_others_v_Mbugua_&_2_others_(Civil_Case_119 of 2017)_[2023] KEHC 25356 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Ruling) |
08b00e2328da-3 | “(1) No appeal or second appeal shall operate as a stay of execution or proceedings under a decree or order appealed from except appeal case of in so far as the court appealed from may order but, the court appealed from may for sufficient cause order stay of execution of such decree or order, and whether the applicatio... | Thiongo_&_2_others_v_Mbugua_&_2_others_(Civil_Case_119 of 2017)_[2023] KEHC 25356 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Ruling) |
08b00e2328da-4 | v.■An order be and is hereby issued requiring the defendants to give a true and just account of the society’s income.
vi.■An order be and is hereby issued compelling the defendants to convene an all-inclusive special general meeting of the society as directed by the Deputy Registrar of Societies vide his letter dated 1... | Thiongo_&_2_others_v_Mbugua_&_2_others_(Civil_Case_119 of 2017)_[2023] KEHC 25356 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Ruling) |
a1e85621f047-0 | REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
COMMERCIAL & TAX DIVISION
CIVIL CASE NO. 303 OF 2011
HANS JURGEN LANGER…….……………………………..1ST PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
JOE MUSYIMI MUTAMBU………….............................1ST DEFENDAN... | Langer_v_Mutambu_&_another_(Civil_Case_303 of 2011)_[2023] KEHC 25372 (KLR)_(Commercial_and_Tax)_(17 November 2023)_(Ruling) |
a1e85621f047-1 | The defendants called for aid, article 159(2) (a) and (d) of the Constitution and sections 1A (1) and 1B (1) (a) of the Civil Procedure Act that regardless of the technicalities, it is just for the Court to allow their application so that they are not condemned unheard.
The defendants faulted the plaintiff for failing... | Langer_v_Mutambu_&_another_(Civil_Case_303 of 2011)_[2023] KEHC 25372 (KLR)_(Commercial_and_Tax)_(17 November 2023)_(Ruling) |
a1e85621f047-2 | On the hearing date, neither the defendants nor their advocates attended court. The case proceeded to hearing and on 25th July 2019 the court delivered judgment allowing the suit.
The plaintiff contended that the defendants filed this application on 5th May 2021, more than one year and eight months after the judgment ... | Langer_v_Mutambu_&_another_(Civil_Case_303 of 2011)_[2023] KEHC 25372 (KLR)_(Commercial_and_Tax)_(17 November 2023)_(Ruling) |
a1e85621f047-3 | The plaintiff cited brahim Mungara Mwangi v Francis Ndegwa Mwangi [2014] eKLR and Water Parnters International v Benjamin K’oyoo T/A Group of Women in Agriculture – Kochieng (Gwako) Ministries (Civil Case No. 105 of 2010) [2014] eKLR, that the application had been brought after an inordinate delay.
The plaintiff furthe... | Langer_v_Mutambu_&_another_(Civil_Case_303 of 2011)_[2023] KEHC 25372 (KLR)_(Commercial_and_Tax)_(17 November 2023)_(Ruling) |
a1e85621f047-4 | In a regular default judgment, the defendant will have been duly served with summons to enter appearance, but for one reason or another, he had failed to enter appearances or to file defence, resulting in default judgment. Such a defendant is entitled, under Order 10 Rule 11 of the Civil Procedure Rules, to move the co... | Langer_v_Mutambu_&_another_(Civil_Case_303 of 2011)_[2023] KEHC 25372 (KLR)_(Commercial_and_Tax)_(17 November 2023)_(Ruling) |
a1e85621f047-5 | The basis of approach in Kenya to the exercise of the discretion to be employed or rejected under either Rule 8 or Rule 10 (the latter dealing with judgement by default) is that if service of summons to enter appearance has not been effected, the lack of an initiating process will cause the steps taken to set aside ex ... | Langer_v_Mutambu_&_another_(Civil_Case_303 of 2011)_[2023] KEHC 25372 (KLR)_(Commercial_and_Tax)_(17 November 2023)_(Ruling) |
a1e85621f047-6 | The record shows that the defendants had been served with summons, entered appearance and filed a defence. Their advocate was also served with a hearing notice but both the defendants and their advocate failed to attend court for the hearing of the case. Failure to attend court, though served, did not make the judgment... | Langer_v_Mutambu_&_another_(Civil_Case_303 of 2011)_[2023] KEHC 25372 (KLR)_(Commercial_and_Tax)_(17 November 2023)_(Ruling) |
a1e85621f047-7 | [E]ven where the judgement is regular, the court still retains the wide discretion to set the same aside though if the Court decides to set aside the judgement, depending on the circumstances, it may do so on conditions that are just. That discretion, being wide, the main concern is for the court to do justice to the p... | Langer_v_Mutambu_&_another_(Civil_Case_303 of 2011)_[2023] KEHC 25372 (KLR)_(Commercial_and_Tax)_(17 November 2023)_(Ruling) |
a1e85621f047-8 | I have perused the affidavit of service by Benson Mutinda sworn on 12th June 2019. The process server served a hearing notice on the defendant’s Advocates which was received and stamped. The defendants did not explain why they did not take steps to find out from their advocates the status of their case even if the advo... | Langer_v_Mutambu_&_another_(Civil_Case_303 of 2011)_[2023] KEHC 25372 (KLR)_(Commercial_and_Tax)_(17 November 2023)_(Ruling) |
a1e85621f047-9 | Taking into account all the circumstances surrounding this case, I find this application unmeritorious. Consequently, the application is declined and dismissed with costs.
Dated Signed and Delivered at Nairobi this 17th Day of November 2023
E C MWITA
... | Langer_v_Mutambu_&_another_(Civil_Case_303 of 2011)_[2023] KEHC 25372 (KLR)_(Commercial_and_Tax)_(17 November 2023)_(Ruling) |
929df11d12ee-0 | REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE EMPLOYMENT AND LABOUR RELATIONS COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
CAUSE NO. 1363 OF 2018
KENYA UNION OF COMMERCIAL, FOOD AND ALLIED WORKERS■CLAIMANT
- VERSUS -
GALOT ESTATE KIAMBU■…………. RESPONDENT
(Before Hon. Justice Byram Ongaya on Friday 17th November, 2023)
JUDGMENT
The claimant filed the memorand... | Kenya_Union_Of_Commercial,_Food_and_Allied_Workers_v_Kiambu_(Cause_1363 of 2018)_[2023] KEELRC 2939 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Judgment) |
929df11d12ee-1 | The letter of reinstatement, indicated that the same would serve as a first warning. Subsequently on 05.11.2016, the employee was issued with another termination letter. However, the respondent had miscalculated his dues.
The termination letter referred to an issue that was resolved in June 2016. Aggrieved, the employ... | Kenya_Union_Of_Commercial,_Food_and_Allied_Workers_v_Kiambu_(Cause_1363 of 2018)_[2023] KEELRC 2939 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Judgment) |
929df11d12ee-2 | The 1st issue is whether the grievant William Nyakundi Marori was a member of the claimant trade union. The claimant has pleaded that there is no recognition or collective agreements between the parties. The claimant has pleaded that by its registered constitution, it represents employees in real estate enterprises whi... | Kenya_Union_Of_Commercial,_Food_and_Allied_Workers_v_Kiambu_(Cause_1363 of 2018)_[2023] KEELRC 2939 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Judgment) |
929df11d12ee-3 | In conclusion the statement of claim and the counterclaim are dismissed with no orders in costs.
Signed, dated and delivered by video-link and in court at Nairobi this Friday 17th November, 2023.
BYRAM ONGAYA
PRINCIPAL JUDGE | Kenya_Union_Of_Commercial,_Food_and_Allied_Workers_v_Kiambu_(Cause_1363 of 2018)_[2023] KEELRC 2939 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Judgment) |
6061f67aa737-0 | REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT BUNGOMA
SUCCESSION CAUSE NO.3 OF 2019
IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF FRANCIS WEKESA
JOSEPH WAMALWA WEKESA ……… .1ST PETITIONER/PROTESTOR
FLORENCE NAMAROME WEKESA …..2ND PETITIONER
ANN KISAKA OTIENO ……………………3RD PETITINER
JUDGEMENT | In_re_Estate_of_Francis_Wekesa_(Deceased)_(Succession_Cause_3 of 2019)_[2023] KEHC 25420 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Judgment) |
6061f67aa737-1 | The 1st Petitioner herein filed an affidavit of protest dated 29th day of April, 2021 in which he challenged the summons for confirmation of grant filed dated 29th January, 2021 filed by the 2nd and 3rd Petitioners. The protestor’s gravamen is inter alia; that some beneficiaries namely Patrick Wanyonyi, Violet Nanja... | In_re_Estate_of_Francis_Wekesa_(Deceased)_(Succession_Cause_3 of 2019)_[2023] KEHC 25420 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Judgment) |
6061f67aa737-2 | in the names of the said Pinka Kitui Namachanja; that from the apparent search of LR NO. E. BUKUSU/W. SANGALO/487 Titus Nabukhamba has already moved to exercise his beneficial rights thereto by registering a caustion over the said parcel; that the said Titus Nabukhamba and Samuel Wanjala ought to only play th... | In_re_Estate_of_Francis_Wekesa_(Deceased)_(Succession_Cause_3 of 2019)_[2023] KEHC 25420 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Judgment) |
6061f67aa737-3 | Ann Kisaka Otieno – 2.9 acres
Florence Namarome ( to have life interest in the same )
Joseph Wekesa – 4 acres.
Partiies agreed to canvass the protest and the summons for confirmation of grant by way of viva voce ( oral) evidence. Parties filed and exchanged witness statements and documents before reception of the evi... | In_re_Estate_of_Francis_Wekesa_(Deceased)_(Succession_Cause_3 of 2019)_[2023] KEHC 25420 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Judgment) |
6061f67aa737-4 | PROT. W2 John Kasembeli- Wafula adopted his witness statement dated 16/11/2021 as his evidence in chief. On cvross-ecamination, he stated that the deceased was his younger uncle and the last born in the family. That the 2nd petitioner is the second wife of the deceased after the first wife died. That the 2nd petitioner... | In_re_Estate_of_Francis_Wekesa_(Deceased)_(Succession_Cause_3 of 2019)_[2023] KEHC 25420 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Judgment) |
6061f67aa737-5 | PROT. W3 George Mateyi Gabriel adopted his witness statement dated 14/1/2022 as his evidence in chief. He introduced himself as the secretary general of Bahengele clan in Kenya. On cross-examination, he stated that he cannot recall the date deceased married the 2nd petitioner but that the deceased had inherited the 2nd... | In_re_Estate_of_Francis_Wekesa_(Deceased)_(Succession_Cause_3 of 2019)_[2023] KEHC 25420 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Judgment) |
6061f67aa737-6 | PROT. W4 Joseph Wamalwa Wekesa the protestor herein relied on his affidavit of protest sworn on 29/4/2021 as well as the documents annexed thereto as his evidence in chief. On cross-examination, he stated that he opposes the distribution by his co-petitioners as they have their own portions of land elsewhere. That he i... | In_re_Estate_of_Francis_Wekesa_(Deceased)_(Succession_Cause_3 of 2019)_[2023] KEHC 25420 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Judgment) |
6061f67aa737-7 | PROT. W6 Moses Nyongesa testified that he is the senior chief of Khalaba location. He sought to rely on minutes taken on 2/4/2019 wherein he was present and participated in in the offices of the Assistant County Commisioner Kanduyi Division and that he later wrote an introductory letter for purposes of instituting a su... | In_re_Estate_of_Francis_Wekesa_(Deceased)_(Succession_Cause_3 of 2019)_[2023] KEHC 25420 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Judgment) |
6061f67aa737-8 | PET. W2 Anne Kisaka Otieno the 3rd petitioner herein testified that she is the first born child of the deceased who left behind six children including herself. She stated that she found the 1st petitioner when she was born and that her father later introduced Patrick Wanyonyi in 2012. She added that the deceased died i... | In_re_Estate_of_Francis_Wekesa_(Deceased)_(Succession_Cause_3 of 2019)_[2023] KEHC 25420 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Judgment) |
6061f67aa737-9 | On re-examination, he stated that he was chased by Kasembeli who demolished his house and that hei not able to access the portion allocated to him due to harassment by Kasembeli who has gone ahead to lease his portion of land. That he does not have land at his biological father’s home as alleged by the 1st petitioner.
... | In_re_Estate_of_Francis_Wekesa_(Deceased)_(Succession_Cause_3 of 2019)_[2023] KEHC 25420 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Judgment) |
6061f67aa737-10 | On re-examination, she stated that there is a family dispute as they are ubnable to access the land. That it is the 1st petitioner who is in cahoots with Kasembeli and both of whom demolished her mother’s house. That the 1st petitioner is of unsound mind. That during the ‘’lufu’’ ceremony, all the assets of the deceas... | In_re_Estate_of_Francis_Wekesa_(Deceased)_(Succession_Cause_3 of 2019)_[2023] KEHC 25420 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Judgment) |
6061f67aa737-11 | On cross-examination, he stated that he was born in 1977 and joined Kibabii Catholic Seminary in 1995 as an employee. That in 2012 the deceased organized a ceremony where he received him as hs son and he later went back to the seminary. That he used a different name during registration for an identity card as he had no... | In_re_Estate_of_Francis_Wekesa_(Deceased)_(Succession_Cause_3 of 2019)_[2023] KEHC 25420 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Judgment) |
6061f67aa737-12 | Parties filed and exchanged written submissions.
Mr Murunga, learned counsel for the 1st petitioner/protestor raised two issues for determination namely whether Samuel Wanjala Wekesa, Violet Nanjala Wekesa, Titus Nabukhamba and Patrick Wanyonyi are children of the deceased and/or dependents and whether the court shoul... | In_re_Estate_of_Francis_Wekesa_(Deceased)_(Succession_Cause_3 of 2019)_[2023] KEHC 25420 (KLR)_(17 November 2023)_(Judgment) |
End of preview. Expand in Data Studio
No dataset card yet
- Downloads last month
- 41