Civil Practice and Procedure - consent order - review and setting aside of consent orders - circumstances in which a consent judgment may be reviewed or set aside - application to review or set aside a consent order - grounds: fraud, new matters had arisen which were not previously known to the parties, the suit was res judicata and that the plaintiff had concealed material facts - duty of the applicant to satisfy the court that the consent order should be reviewed or set aside.

[RULING] Succession Law-oral will-factors determining the validity of an oral will-Law of Succession Act (cap. 160), Section 9(1)

JURISDICTION – court jurisdiction – where a lower court had granted garnishee orders – garnishee had agreed to pay out all the debt but failed to do so without reason – whether that court had the mandate to follow up and ensure that the orders were executed

Negligence - road traffic accident - apportionment of liability - measure of general damages for personal injuries - appeal against finding on liability and award of damages

[RULING] Civil Practice and Procedure-suit-reinstatement-where the suit had been dismissed for want of prosecution-where the applicant had not explained the reason for delay in making the application-whether the suit should be reinstated

Judicial Review-applicable laws-whether Order IXB, rule 8 of the Civil Procedure Rules apply to Judicial Review

[RULING]

Judicial review - jurisdiction of the High Court - applicant seeking orders of certiorari and prohibition against the Kenya Cricket Association and the International Cricket Council - preliminary objection raised on the grounds that the respondents were private bodies to which judicial review did not apply, that the applicant had failed to invoke an alternative remedy and that the 1st respondent could not be sued as it was an association - judicial review orders will only issue against public bodies or persons performing public functions - whether the applicant having submitted to the code of conduct of the International Cricket Council he was bound by the rules which were sufficient to determine his case and being a private right it could not be enforced under public law - whether the respondents had been exercising a quasi-judicial function and therefore amenable to judicial review - whether the 1st respondent being a club or association it was not a legal entity and it could not be sued in its own name - whether it should be struck off the proceedings

[Ruling] Civil Procedure – costs – taxation of costs – improper stay of execution of taxed bill of costs – application to set aside ex parte orders and to stay proceedings – applicant alleging that the ex parte injunction/restraining orders had been obtained through the non-disclosure of material facts and offended natural justice – whether taxation of costs is a special regime which precludes the application of ordinary rules of civil procedure - Civil Procedure Rules Order L rule 17; Civil Procedure Act sections 6, 63(e)

Company Law-co-operatives-whether a subordinate court has the jurisdiction to determine a dispute between a past member of a co-operative society and the society-whether a Co-operative Tribunal has the powers to grant the equitable remedy of injunctions- Co-operative Societies Act No. 12 of 1997, Sections 76 and 77; Co-operative Societies (Amendment) Act No. 2 of 2004, Section 80 (4)

Criminal Law-robbery with violence-ingredients, which need to be proved to constitute the offence

Evidence-identification-where the incident took about forty five seconds-whether this was sufficient time for the complainant to identify the accused

CRIMINAL LAW – robbery with violence – crime of – accused was charged and convicted of the crime of – Penal Code (Cap 63) section 296(2)

Evidence – witness – identification – where the crime was committed at night – circumstances under which the identification was done – whether light was sufficient to enable identification by the witness

Evidence – identification parade – ingredients of a proper identification parade – where the witness did not identify the accused from an identification parade – whether this can invalidate the conviction

Evidence – corroboration – where the accused was found with the stolen property from the crime scene – whether the courts can use this evidence in reaching a decision