Case Search

pillars

Case Type: Civil Case


FORT PROPERTIES LTD V STEPHEN K. SARO & 11 OTHERS[2012]eKLR

Case Number: Civil Case 171 of 2011 & 72 OF 2012 Date Delivered: 02 Nov 2012

Judge: C. W. Meoli

Court: High Court at Malindi

Parties: FORT PROPERTIES LTD V STEPHEN K. SARO & 11 OTHERS

Citation: FORT PROPERTIES LTD V STEPHEN K. SARO & 11 OTHERS[2012] eKLR

Read More

FERRUZ OMAR MAGHRAM & 4 OTHERS V AHMED MOHAMED HONEY[2012]eKLR

Case Number: Civil Case 15 of 2011 Date Delivered: 01 Nov 2012

Judge: C. W. Meoli

Court: High Court at Malindi

Parties: FERRUZ OMAR MAGHRAM & 4 OTHERS V AHMED MOHAMED HONEY

Citation: FERRUZ OMAR MAGHRAM & 4 OTHERS V AHMED MOHAMED HONEY[2012] eKLR

Read More

ROSA ADISA MAGALA V BONIFACE AMWAYI [2012] eKLR

Case Number: Civil Case 109 of 2012 Date Delivered: 01 Nov 2012

Judge: Said J. Chitembwe

Court: High Court at Kakamega

Parties: ROSA ADISA MAGALA v BONIFACE AMWAYI

Citation: ROSA ADISA MAGALA V BONIFACE AMWAYI [2012] eKLR

Read More

WILFRED GISEBE GISEBE V KERINKANI GROUP RANCH[2012]eKLR

Case Number: Civil Case 62 of 2002 Date Delivered: 01 Nov 2012

Judge: RUTH NEKOYE SITATI

Court: High Court at Kisii

Parties: WILFRED GISEBE GISEBE V KERINKANI GROUP RANCH

Citation: WILFRED GISEBE GISEBE V KERINKANI GROUP RANCH[2012] eKLR

Read More

SABINA ADHIAMBO ODONGO V RUTH WANGUI & ANOTHER[2012]eKLR

Case Number: Civil Case 97 of 2011 Date Delivered: 01 Nov 2012

Judge: RUTH NEKOYE SITATI

Court: High Court at Kisii

Parties: SABINA ADHIAMBO ODONGO V RUTH WANGUI & ANOTHER

Citation: SABINA ADHIAMBO ODONGO V RUTH WANGUI & ANOTHER[2012] eKLR

Read More

KIJATA ENTERPRISES LTD V KENYA POWER & LIGHTING CO.LTD[2012]eKLR

Case Number: Civil Case 72 of 2002 Date Delivered: 01 Nov 2012

Judge: J. A. MAKAU

Court: High Court at Meru

Parties: KIJATA ENTERPRISES LTD V KENYA POWER & LIGHTING CO.LTD

Citation: KIJATA ENTERPRISES LTD V KENYA POWER & LIGHTING CO.LTD[2012] eKLR

Read More

UHURU MUIGAI KENYATTA V BARAZA LIMITED T/a KENYA TELEVISION NETWORK (KTN)[2012]eKLR

Case Number: Civil Case 60 of 2010 Date Delivered: 01 Nov 2012

Judge: M.A. ANG'AWA

Court: High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)

Parties: UHURU MUIGAI KENYATTA V BARAZA LIMITED t/a KENYA TELEVISION NETWORK (KTN)

Citation: UHURU MUIGAI KENYATTA V BARAZA LIMITED T/a KENYA TELEVISION NETWORK (KTN)[2012] eKLR

Read More

SAID ADAM KAZUNGU V KIBOKONI PROPERTIES LIMITED[2012]eKLR

Case Number: Civil Case 38 of 2012 Date Delivered: 31 Oct 2012

Judge: C. W. Meoli

Court: High Court at Malindi

Parties: SAID ADAM KAZUNGU V KIBOKONI PROPERTIES LIMITED

Citation: SAID ADAM KAZUNGU V KIBOKONI PROPERTIES LIMITED[2012] eKLR

Read More

KIPTOO ARAP CHIRCHIR V BOAZ KIBOI & 2 OTHERS[2012]eKLR

Case Number: Civil Case 56 of 2003 Date Delivered: 31 Oct 2012

Judge: J.R. KARANJA

Court: High Court at Kitale

Parties: KIPTOO ARAP CHIRCHIR V BOAZ KIBOI & 2 OTHERS

Citation: KIPTOO ARAP CHIRCHIR V BOAZ KIBOI & 2 OTHERS[2012] eKLR

Read More

ISAAC ADUVAGAH V STANDARD CHARTERED BANK LIMITED[2012]eKLR

Case Number: Civil Case 56 of 2000 Date Delivered: 31 Oct 2012

Judge: M.K IBRAHIM

Court: High Court at Eldoret

Parties: ISAAC ADUVAGAH V STANDARD CHARTERED BANK LIMITED

Citation: ISAAC ADUVAGAH V STANDARD CHARTERED BANK LIMITED[2012] eKLR

Read More

FUNDI K.BIWOTT & ANOTHER V ANTHONY K. LELEI[2012]eKLR

Case Number: Civil Case 183 of 2002 Date Delivered: 31 Oct 2012

Judge: M.K IBRAHIM

Court: High Court at Eldoret

Parties: FUNDI K.BIWOTT & ANOTHER V ANTHONY K. LELEI

Citation: FUNDI K.BIWOTT & ANOTHER V ANTHONY K. LELEI[2012] eKLR

Read More

JAMI IYATU TAALIMIL QURAN (JTQ) V ABOUD ATHMAN & 2 Others [2012] eKLR

Case Number: Civil Case 544 of 2011 Date Delivered: 31 Oct 2012

Judge: Edward M. Muriithi

Court: High Court at Mombasa

Parties: JAMI IYATU TAALIMIL QURAN (JTQ) v ABOUD ATHMAN & 2 others

Citation: JAMI IYATU TAALIMIL QURAN (JTQ) V ABOUD ATHMAN & 2 Others [2012] eKLR

Read More

SIMEON MUSYOKA MAVUA V JAMES MUTUNGA MAVUA & 5 OTHERS[2012]eKLR

Case Number: Civil Case 16 of 2009 Date Delivered: 31 Oct 2012

Judge: ASIKE MAKHANDIA

Court: High Court at Machakos

Parties: SIMEON MUSYOKA MAVUA V JAMES MUTUNGA MAVUA & 5 OTHERS

Citation: SIMEON MUSYOKA MAVUA V JAMES MUTUNGA MAVUA & 5 OTHERS[2012] eKLR

Read More

MICHAEL OMONDI OTIENO & Another V HILDA AYACKO OCHIENG & Another [2012] eKLR

Case Number: Civil Case 24 of 2006 Date Delivered: 31 Oct 2012

Judge: M. K. IBRAHIM

Court: High Court at Eldoret

Parties: MICHAEL OMONDI OTIENO & Another v HILDA AYACKO OCHIENG & Another

Citation: MICHAEL OMONDI OTIENO & Another V HILDA AYACKO OCHIENG & Another [2012] eKLR

Read More

GENALD MUTURI MAINA V MAVJI RAMJI PATEL[2012]eKLR

Case Number: Civil Case 586 of 2005 Date Delivered: 31 Oct 2012

Judge: A. MBOGHOLI MSAGHA

Court: High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)

Parties: GENALD MUTURI MAINA V MAVJI RAMJI PATEL

Citation: GENALD MUTURI MAINA V MAVJI RAMJI PATEL[2012] eKLR

Read More

NASIR ALI ABDALLA & ANOTHER V JAMES KANYOTU & ANOTHER[2012]eKLR

Case Number: Civil Case 180 of 2005 Date Delivered: 31 Oct 2012

Judge: M. ODERO

Court: High Court at Mombasa

Parties: NASIR ALI ABDALLA & ANOTHER V JAMES KANYOTU & ANOTHER

Citation: NASIR ALI ABDALLA & ANOTHER V JAMES KANYOTU & ANOTHER[2012] eKLR

Read More

CHILD WELFARE SOCIETY OF KENYA REGISTERED TRUSTEES V NATION MEDIA GROUP LTD T/a NATION NEWSPAPERS & 2 OTHERS[2012]eKLR

Case Number: Civil Case 272 of 2012 Date Delivered: 31 Oct 2012

Judge: M.A. ANG'AWA

Court: High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)

Parties: CHILD WELFARE SOCIETY OF KENYA REGISTERED TRUSTEES V NATION MEDIA GROUP LTD t/a NATION NEWSPAPERS & 2 OTHERS

Citation: CHILD WELFARE SOCIETY OF KENYA REGISTERED TRUSTEES V NATION MEDIA GROUP LTD T/a NATION NEWSPAPERS & 2 OTHERS[2012] eKLR

Read More

JUSTO NGOKA & 225 OTHERS V RAI PLYWOOD (K) LTD & 2 OTHERS[2012]eKLR

Case Number: Civil Case 69 of 2001 Date Delivered: 31 Oct 2012

Judge: M.K IBRAHIM

Court: High Court at Eldoret

Parties: JUSTO NGOKA & 225 OTHERS V RAI PLYWOOD (K) LTD & 2 OTHERS

Citation: JUSTO NGOKA & 225 OTHERS V RAI PLYWOOD (K) LTD & 2 OTHERS[2012] eKLR

Read More

ISAAC NDARWA KIARIE V HARRISON WAFULA KHAMALA & ANOTHER[2012]eKLR

Case Number: Civil Case 20 of 2005 Date Delivered: 30 Oct 2012

Judge: J.R. KARANJA.

Court: High Court at Kitale

Parties: ISAAC NDARWA KIARIE V HARRISON WAFULA KHAMALA & ANOTHER

Citation: ISAAC NDARWA KIARIE V HARRISON WAFULA KHAMALA & ANOTHER[2012] eKLR

Read More

JOSES MATI M’MAUTA V MITHIKA LINTURI & Another [2012] eKLR

Case Number: Civil Case 71 of 2010 Date Delivered: 30 Oct 2012

Judge: J. A. MAKAU

Court: High Court at Meru

Parties: JOSES MATI M’MAUTA v MITHIKA LINTURI & Another

Citation: JOSES MATI M’MAUTA V MITHIKA LINTURI & Another [2012] eKLR

Read More

PAUL GERRIT JASPERS & Another V DALMAS ODHENGO & 2 Others [2012] eKLR

Case Number: Civil Case 220 of 2011 Date Delivered: 29 Oct 2012

Judge: H.K. CHEMITEI

Court: High Court at Kisumu

Parties: PAUL GERRIT JASPERS & Another v DALMAS ODHENGO & 2 Others

Citation: PAUL GERRIT JASPERS & Another V DALMAS ODHENGO & 2 Others [2012] eKLR

Read More

Christopher Ndarathi Murungaru V Standard Limited & 2 Others [2012] eKLR

Case Number: Civil 513 of 2011 Date Delivered: 29 Oct 2012

Judge: George Vincent Odunga

Court: High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)

Parties: Christopher Ndarathi Murungaru v Standard Limited, Ben Agina & David Ohito

Citation: Christopher Ndarathi Murungaru V Standard Limited & 2 Others [2012] eKLR

In a defamation suit, the role of the Court is not to control, penalize or interfere with the media.

Christopher Ndarathi Murungaru v Standard Limited & 2 others [2012] eKLR

Civil No. 513 of 2011

High Court of Kenya at Nairobi

G V Odunga J

October 29, 2012

Reported by Njeri Githang’a Kamau & Charles Mutua

Brief Facts

The plaintiff sought various remedies for defamation in the cause of action which arose from publications attributed to the defendants’ publications which, in the plaintiff’s view were defamatory of the plaintiff. The defendant filed a defence in which while admitting publishing the alleged articles denied that the same were defamatory of the plaintiff. The defendant went ahead and raised a preliminary objection on the ground that the Court had no jurisdiction to hear the suit by virtue of article 34(2) of the Constitution of Kenya, 2010 which provided for the freedom of the media. The defendant contended that if the Court upheld the objection a precedent that gave true meaning to the letter and spirit of article 34 of the Constitution of Kenya was to be set in line with the hopes and conscious decision of the Kenyan people in enacting that article. While setting out the provisions of article 34(2) and 260 of the Constitution, it was submitted that the Court was an office and the judiciary was an organ comprising the Government of the Republic under the Constitution. Article 34(2), gave specific rights of freedom to the media barring any control of state over or interference with any person engaged in broadcasting, production or circulation of any publication or the dissemination of information by any medium. It was that preliminary objection that was the subject of the ruling.

Issues

  1. Whether a civil suit instituted by a private person seeking to vindicate his lost dignity and reputation against the media amounts to State control of the media?

  2. Whether, in a defamation suit, the role of the Court was to control, penalize or interfere with the media.

  3. Whether a suit for defamation fell under article 33(3) which deals with respect of the rights and reputation of others and not under article 34(2) of the Constitution which provided for the freedom of the media?

  4. Whether under article 34 of the Constitution a person’s right to be respected applied to the media in so far as the Court’s jurisdiction to grant the remedies stipulated in article 23 were concerned

  5.  Whether the Complaints Commission provided for by Section 23 of the Media Act No. 3 of 2007 deprived of the Court’s jurisdiction to adjudicate complaints against the media

Constitutional law - fundamental rights and freedoms - freedom of expression-right of the press to impart information of general interest or concern and right of the public to receive it- media freedom-whether a civil suit instituted by a private person seeking to vindicate his lost dignity and reputation against the media amount to State control of the media and freedom of expression-Constitution of Kenya 2010, articles 2,10,22,23,24,25,27,28,31,33,34,45,46,53,54,55,50, 162,165,259 & 260; Media Act No. 3 of 2007 Section 23.

Media Law – freedom of the media – regulation of the media –what amounts to media interference and curtailing- whether the Court had authority to control, interfere, penalize or interfere with the media– Constitution of Kenya, 2010, articles 2,10,22,23,24,25,27,28,31,33,34,45,46,53,54,55,50,162,165,259 & 260; Media Act No. 3 of 2007 Section 23.

Relevant provisions

33. Freedom of expression

 

(1) Every person has the right to freedom of expression, which includes—

 

  1. freedom to seek, receive or impart information or ideas;

 

  1. freedom of artistic creativity; and

 

  1. academic freedom and freedom of scientific research.

 

 

(2) The right to freedom of expression does not extend to—

 

(a) propaganda for war;

 

(b) incitement to violence;

 

(c) hate speech; or

 

(d) Advocacy of hatred that—

 

  1. constitutes ethnic incitement, vilification of others or incitement

to cause harm; or

 

  1. is based on any ground of discrimination specified or

contemplated in Article 27(4).

 

(3) In the exercise of the right to freedom of expression, every person shall

respect the rights and reputation of others.

 

 

34. Freedom of the media

 

(1) Freedom and independence of electronic, print and all other types of media

is guaranteed, but does not extend to any expression specified in Article 33(2).

 

(2) The State shall not—

 

  1. exercise control over or interfere with any person engaged in

broadcasting, the production or circulation of any publication or the

dissemination of information by any medium; or

 

  1. penalise any person for any opinion or view or the content of any

broadcast, publication or dissemination.

 

(3) Broadcasting and other electronic media have freedom of establishment,

subject only to licensing procedures that—

 

  1. are necessary to regulate the airwaves and other forms of signal

distribution; and

 

  1. are independent of control by government, political interests or

commercial interests.

 

(4) All State-owned media shall—

 

  1. be free to determine independently the editorial content of their

broadcasts or other communications;

 

  1. be impartial; and

 

  1. afford fair opportunity for the presentation of divergent views and

dissenting opinions.

 

(5) Parliament shall enact legislation that provides for the establishment of a

body, which shall—

 

  1. be independent of control by government, political interests or

commercial interests;

 

  1. reflect the interests of all sections of the society; and

 

  1. set media standards and regulate and monitor compliance with those

standards.


 

Held

  1. The Constitution was to be interpreted both contextually and purposefully since it was an ambulatory living instrument designed for the good governance, liberties, welfare and protection of all persons. The task of expounding a Constitution was crucially different from that of construing a statute. A statute defined present rights and obligations and it was easily enacted and easily repealed. A Constitution by contrast was drafted with an eye to the future. Its function was to provide a continuing framework for the legitimate exercise of governmental power and when joined by a bill or charter of rights, for the unremitting protection of individual rights and liberties. Once enacted, its provisions could not easily be repealed or amended. It had to be capable of growth and development over time to meet new social, political and historical realities often unimagined by its framers.

  2. Freedom of expression entailed the freedom to hold opinions and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, either orally, in writing, in print, in the form of art, or through other chosen media, without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. That recognition underpinned the important role played by the media in the development of a society. A democratic society could not exist without the freedom to express new ideas and put forward opinions about the functioning of public institutions.

  3. Having chosen the path of democratic governance, Kenya had a duty to protect the rights regarding the free flow of information, free debate and open discussion of issues that concerned the citizens of the country. In order to exercise these rights there had to be an enabling regime for people to freely express their ideas and opinions as long as in enjoying these rights such people did not prejudice the rights and freedoms of others or public interest. As long as in expressing one’s opinion even if it was false, the person doing so did not prejudice the rights and freedoms of others there would be no harm done.

  4. Chapter 4 of the Constitution entrenched the bill of rights and freedoms which the people of the Republic of Kenya decided to specifically spell out in the Constitution. These fundamental freedoms and rights comprised rights which were incapable of being limited and the Constitution expressly set out the fundamental freedoms and rights which could not be limited in article 25 as freedom from torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment; freedom from slavery or servitude; the right to a fair trial; and the right to an order of habeas corpus. Since the freedom of expression was not expressly mentioned under article 25, the first impression one got was that freedom of expression was not absolute or boundless and that limitations could be imposed on the freedom of expression, which strike a balance between freedom of expression and of the press and other basic rights and social rights, protected by law.

  5. Under article 24(1)(d) of the Constitution no restriction of the freedom was permissible unless it was intended to ensure that the enjoyment of rights and fundamental freedoms by any individual did not prejudice the rights and fundamental freedoms of others.

  6. Under article 34(2) of the Constitution which provided for the freedom of the media, the State was prohibited in mandatory terms from exercising control over or interfering with any person engaged in broadcasting, the production or circulation of any publication or the dissemination of information by any medium or penalizing any person for any opinion or view or the content of any broadcast, publication or dissemination. Under article 34(1), however, the freedom and independence of electronic, print and all other types of media, though guaranteed, did not extend to propaganda for war; incitement to violence; hate speech; or advocacy of hatred that constitute ethnic incitement, vilification of others or incitement to cause harm; or was based on any ground of discrimination specified or contemplated in article 27 (4).

  7. Although the defendant’s position was that the entrenchment of article 34 of the Constitution placed Kenya on a different plane from where it was before the promulgation of the Constitution, 2010, article 34 was a reflection of the international standards expected of a democratic society. The trend world over was that the State ought to desist from taking actions whose effects amounted to controlling or interfering with the freedom of the media, the necessity for the enactment of article 34 of the Constitution was informed by certain actions taken against the Media in Kenya prior to the promulgation of the Constitution. That was not to say that such actions were even then warranted or justified in a free and democratic State. The enactment of article 34 was meant to ensure that the State did not feign ignorance of its obligations to the media by resorting to outmoded tactics in its attempt to silence the media. Therefore article 34 could not be considered in isolation but had to be looked at in the light of the historical perspective and misdemeanors on the part of the State agencies, the Legislature, the Executive and the Judiciary all included.

  8. In a suit for defamation and in civil suits for that matter the Court’s role was that of an independent arbiter between two disputants. In doing so the Court was empowered under article 23(3) of the Constitution to grant appropriate relief including a declaration of rights, an injunction, a conservatory order and an order for compensation. To say that in doing so the Court was controlling or interfering with or punishing one of the parties was to miss the point. Such remedies as an award of exemplary and aggravated damages would have to be looked at afresh in light of the current Constitutional provisions.

  9. In interpreting the Constitution, the Court must under the rule of harmony recognize that the entire Constitution had to be read as an integrated whole and no one particular provision destroying the other but each sustaining the other. The Court had to promote the spirit, purpose and objects of the Constitution. The language of the provisions construed must not be strained by the judge so as to accord with her/his own subjective moral values, otherwise the spirit of the Constitution would be lost. All provisions bearing upon a particular subject were to be considered together and construed as a whole.

  10. Under article 28 of the Constitution every person had inherent dignity and the right to have that dignity respected and protected while article 31 dealt with the right to privacy. “Dignity” was described in Oxford Advance Learner’s Dictionary as “the quality that earns or deserves respect”. Articles 28 and 31 therefore recognized the right of a person to be respected. Where such respect was not accorded when due, a person was entitled to ask the Court for an appropriate remedy under article 23 aforesaid.

  11. Articles, 23, 28, 31, 33 and 34 of the Constitution had to be read together so as to gather the spirit of the Constitution without dismembering the Constitution. For the Court to decide that the remedies stipulated under article 23 of the Constitution did not apply to the media when the Court enforced the rights of a person under article 28 would amount to an amendment of the Constitution or at worst rendering article 28 partly inoperative and the Court had no jurisdiction to do that.

  12. Article 34 could not be divorced from its historical foundation. It was the need to grant the media more freedom and independence that called for the same. However, it was not the desire by the people of the Republic of Kenya to give the media a free hand in publishing offending materials that conceived article 34. By enacting article 34 the people of the Republic of Kenya did not divested themselves of the right to resort to Courts of law in order to protect their reputation, privacy and dignity under articles 28 and 31 of the Constitution.

  13. The remedies under the Media Act, 2007 were aimed towards reprimand, apology and punishment of the media house rather than compensating the victim. The Act did not deal with award of damages, in omitting to provide for damages for compensation Parliament had been aware of the potential conflict that would have caused and hence the wise decision to omit that remedy from the options available to the Complaints Commission. It was contrary to the rules of the constitutional validity of a legislative or constitutional provision, that both purpose and the effect were relevant to the determination to contend that article 28 of the Constitution was alive when the remedy available to a party whose rights were threatened, violated or infringed was made illusory by deprivation of the Court’s jurisdiction to adjudicate thereon while the Complaints Commission was rendered powerless to adequately deal with such matters.

  14. Whereas the Court’s authority to control, interfere with or penalize the media for any opinion or view or the content of any broadcast, publication or dissemination had to be viewed in light of the current Constitutional dispensation, the Court was not barred from investigating and adjudicating over any dispute where a person alleged that his rights or fundamental freedoms under article 28 of the Constitution had been infringed and award appropriate remedy. To equate the powers of the Court with that of the Complaints Commission flew in the face of the express Constitutional provisions in article 165(3)(b) which conferred on the High Court the jurisdiction to determine the question whether a right or fundamental freedom in the bill of rights has been denied, violated, infringed or threatened. Such reasoning would also go contrary to the powers of the High Court under article 165(6) to supervise the subordinate courts and any person, body or authority exercising a judicial or quasi-judicial function. Even if there was no avenue for appealing to the High Court and even if the said Act had purported that its decision was final that would not oust the High Court’s supervisory jurisdiction under article 165(6).

Preliminary objection declined with no orders as to costs.

 

Cases
East Africa

1. Esso Standard(U) Ltd v Semu Amanu Opio [1993] UGSC 15- (Followed)
2. Kwacha Group of Companies v Standard Limited & Others Civil Suit No 319 of 2005- (Explained)
3.  Cases
East Africa

1. Esso Standard(U) Ltd v Semu Amanu Opio [1993] UGSC 15- (Followed)
2. Kwacha Group of Companies v Standard Limited & Others Civil Suit No 319 of 2005- (Explained)
3. Lillians v Caltex Oil Kenya Limited [1989] KLR 1-(Mentioned)
4. Mbiyu ,Boniface Waweru v Mary Njeri & Another Civil Case No 639 of 2005  - (Mentioned)
5. Nabori ,Charles Lukeyen & 9 Others v   Attorney General & 3 Others Petition  No 466 of 2006 – (Followed)

6.Nancy Makokha Baraza v Judicial Service Commission & 9 others l Petition No 23 of 2012 – (Followed)
7. Obbo and Another v Attorney General [2004] 1 EA 265 (Scu) – (Mentioned)
8. Olum & Another v Attorney General (2) [1995-1998] 1 EA 258 – (Followed)
9. Re: Harmonised Draft Constitution of Kenya: Bishop Kimani and 2 others v Attorney General  Petition  No 669 of 2009 -(Followed)
10. Richard Nduati Kariuki v Honourable Leonard Nduati Kariuki & Another [2006] 2 KLR 356 – (Followed)
11.
South Africa
1. Minister of Health and Others v Treatment Action Campaign and Others [2002] 5 LRC 216 - (Followed)
India
1.  Express Nespaper & Others v Union of India [1958] SC 578 – (Mentioned)
2. Ramesh Thapar v State of Madras [1959] SCR 12 - (Mentioned)
United Kingdom
1. Reyes v The Queen [2002] 2 AC 235a – (Mentioned)
2. Rosenblatt v Baer 383 US 75, 92 (1966) - (Explained)
Statutes
East Africa

1. Constitution of Kenya,2010 articles 2(3); 10(2);23(3);24(1)(d)25;27(4);28;31;33(2)(3); 34(1)(2)(5); 45; 46; 50 ;53; 54 ; 159(1);162(4);165(3)(b)(6);259;260 - (Interpreted)
2. Media Act, 2007  (Act No 3 of 2007) section 23
Texts & Journals
1. Rousseau  JJ.,(Ed) (1762) The Social Contract or Principles of Political Right
International Instruments
1. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICPR)  (1966) articles 17 ,19
4. Lillians v Caltex Oil Kenya Limited [1989] KLR 1-(Mentioned)
5. Mbiyu ,Boniface Waweru v Mary Njeri & Another Civil Case No 639 of 2005  - (Mentioned)
6. Nabori & 9 others v   Attorney General & 3 others   [2007] 2 KLR 331– (Followed)
7. Obbo and Another v Attorney General [2004] 1 EA 265 (Scu) – (Mentioned)
8. Olum & Another v Attorney General (2) [1995-1998] 1 EA 258 – (Followed)
9. Re: Harmonised Draft Constitution of Kenya: Bishop Kimani and 2 others v Attorney General  Petition  No 669 of 2009 -(Followed)
10. Richard Nduati Kariuki v Honourable Leonard Nduati Kariuki & Another [2006] 2 KLR 356 – (Followed)
11.  University of Nairobi v N K Brothers Limited  [2009] 249  – (Explained)
South Africa
1. Minister of Health and Others v Treatment Action Campaign and Others [2002] 5 LRC 216 - (Followed)
India
1.  Express Nespaper & Others v Union of India [1958] SC 578 – (Mentioned)
2. Ramesh Thapar v State of Madras [1959] SCR 12 - (Mentioned)
United Kingdom
1. Reyes v The Queen [2002] 2 AC 235a – (Mentioned)
2. Rosenblatt v Baer 383 US 75, 92 (1966) - (Explained)
Statutes
East Africa

1. Constitution of Kenya,2010 articles 2(3); 10(2);23(3);24(1)(d)25;27(4);28;31;33(2)(3); 34(1)(2)(5); 45; 46; 50 ;53; 54 ; 159(1);162(4);165(3)(b)(6);259;260 - (Interpreted)
2. Media Act, 2007  (Act No 3 of 2007) section 23 - (Interpreted)
Texts & Journals
1. Rousseau  JJ., (1762) The Social Contract or Principles of Political Right
International Instruments
1. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICPR)  (1966) articles 17 ,19

 

Read More

NATIONAL BANK OF KENYA LIMITED V OBADIAH MAIRA MUNEMA[2012]eKLR

Case Number: Civil Case 471 of 1994 Date Delivered: 26 Oct 2012

Judge: M. J. ANYARA EMUKULE

Court: High Court at Nakuru

Parties: NATIONAL BANK OF KENYA LIMITED V OBADIAH MAIRA MUNEMA

Citation: NATIONAL BANK OF KENYA LIMITED V OBADIAH MAIRA MUNEMA[2012] eKLR

Read More

FANUEL OOKO RARINGO V GUYO SARR HUKA & 2 OTHERS[2012]eKLR

Case Number: Civil Case 352 of 2008 Date Delivered: 26 Oct 2012

Judge: M. J. ANYARA EMUKULE

Court: High Court at Nakuru

Parties: FANUEL OOKO RARINGO V GUYO SARR HUKA & 2 OTHERS

Citation: FANUEL OOKO RARINGO V GUYO SARR HUKA & 2 OTHERS[2012] eKLR

Read More

SAMUEL MUGO MICHUKI V PETER MBIRI MICHUKI[2012]eKLR

Case Number: Civil Case 62 of 2009 Date Delivered: 25 Oct 2012

Judge: J. WAKIAGA

Court: High Court at Nyeri

Parties: SAMUEL MUGO MICHUKI V PETER MBIRI MICHUKI

Citation: SAMUEL MUGO MICHUKI V PETER MBIRI MICHUKI[2012] eKLR

Read More

KENNEDY MWITA & ANOTHER V BOARD OF TRUSTEES NSSF & 2 OTHERS[2012]eKLR

Case Number: Civil Case 701 of 2004 Date Delivered: 25 Oct 2012

Judge: G.V. ODUNGA

Court: High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)

Parties: KENNEDY MWITA & ANOTHER V BOARD OF TRUSTEES NSSF & 2 OTHERS

Citation: KENNEDY MWITA & ANOTHER V BOARD OF TRUSTEES NSSF & 2 OTHERS[2012] eKLR

Read More

HELLEN ADHIAMBO OMORO V FILEMON ONDIEK KIAGE & ANOTHER[2012]eKLR

Case Number: Civil Case 172 of 2010 Date Delivered: 25 Oct 2012

Judge: RUTH NEKOYE SITATI

Court: High Court at Kisii

Parties: HELLEN ADHIAMBO OMORO V FILEMON ONDIEK KIAGE & ANOTHER

Citation: HELLEN ADHIAMBO OMORO V FILEMON ONDIEK KIAGE & ANOTHER[2012] eKLR

Read More

PETER NYANGA ADALA V IMMANUEL OMONDI NYANGA & Another [2012] eKLR

Case Number: Civil Case 228 of 2011 Date Delivered: 24 Oct 2012

Judge: H.K. Chemitei

Court: High Court at Kisumu

Parties: PETER NYANGA ADALA v IMMANUEL OMONDI NYANGA & another

Citation: PETER NYANGA ADALA V IMMANUEL OMONDI NYANGA & Another [2012] eKLR

Read More

SHADRACK WEGULO JUMA V AGRICULTURAL FINANCE CORPORATION & 3 OTHERS[2012]eKLR

Case Number: Civil Case 141 of 2011 Date Delivered: 24 Oct 2012

Judge: B. THURANIRA JADEN

Court: High Court at Kakamega

Parties: SHADRACK WEGULO JUMA V AGRICULTURAL FINANCE CORPORATION & 3 OTHERS

Citation: SHADRACK WEGULO JUMA V AGRICULTURAL FINANCE CORPORATION & 3 OTHERS[2012] eKLR

Read More

KISHAMBA “B” GROUP RANCH V HAMISI MWAKIO & 54 OTHERS[2012]eKLR

Case Number: Civil Case 36 of 2012 Date Delivered: 24 Oct 2012

Judge: F. TUIYOTT

Court: High Court at Mombasa

Parties: KISHAMBA “B” GROUP RANCH V HAMISI MWAKIO & 54 OTHERS

Citation: KISHAMBA “B” GROUP RANCH V HAMISI MWAKIO & 54 OTHERS[2012] eKLR

Read More

NEW KENYA CO-OPERATIVE CREAMERIESLTD V EDWARD MURIU KAMAU & 3 OTHERS[2012]eKLR

Case Number: Civil Case 189 of 2008 Date Delivered: 23 Oct 2012

Judge: G.V. ODUNGA

Court: High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)

Parties: NEW KENYA CO-OPERATIVE CREAMERIESLTD V EDWARD MURIU KAMAU & 3 OTHERS

Citation: NEW KENYA CO-OPERATIVE CREAMERIESLTD V EDWARD MURIU KAMAU & 3 OTHERS[2012] eKLR

Read More

KENYA BREWERIES LIMITED V MUNICIPAL COUNCIL OF MOMBASA & 6 OTHERS[2012]eKLR

Case Number: Civil Case 818 of 1995 Date Delivered: 23 Oct 2012

Judge: F. TUIYOTT

Court: High Court at Mombasa

Parties: KENYA BREWERIES LIMITED V MUNICIPAL COUNCIL OF MOMBASA & 6 OTHERS

Citation: KENYA BREWERIES LIMITED V MUNICIPAL COUNCIL OF MOMBASA & 6 OTHERS[2012] eKLR

Read More

ABDULGAFUR ABDULGANI PASTA V HARRISSON MWARUMBA MBUI[2012]eKLR

Case Number: Civil Case 12 of 2012 Date Delivered: 22 Oct 2012

Judge: C. W. Meoli

Court: High Court at Malindi

Parties: ABDULGAFUR ABDULGANI PASTA V HARRISSON MWARUMBA MBUI

Citation: ABDULGAFUR ABDULGANI PASTA V HARRISSON MWARUMBA MBUI[2012] eKLR

Read More

JAMES MOENGA NYAKWEBA & 2 OTHERS V JAIRO ATENYA ASITIBA[2012]eKLR

Case Number: Civil Case 196 of 2012 Date Delivered: 22 Oct 2012

Judge: G.V. ODUNGA

Court: High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)

Parties: JAMES MOENGA NYAKWEBA & 2 OTHERS V JAIRO ATENYA ASITIBA

Citation: JAMES MOENGA NYAKWEBA & 2 OTHERS V JAIRO ATENYA ASITIBA[2012] eKLR

Read More

AGNES WAMBUI KIRITU V & ANOTHER JOSEPH GACHOKI GITARI T/A GEO-ACRE SURVEYS[2012]eKLR

Case Number: Civil Case 209 of 2012 Date Delivered: 19 Oct 2012

Judge: George Vincent Odunga

Court: High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)

Parties: AGNES WAMBUI KIRITU V & ANOTHER JOSEPH GACHOKI GITARI T/A GEO-ACRE SURVEYS

Citation: AGNES WAMBUI KIRITU V & ANOTHER JOSEPH GACHOKI GITARI T/A GEO-ACRE SURVEYS[2012] eKLR

Read More

LOTUS HOTEL V WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY[2012]eKLR

Case Number: Civil Case 151 of 2010 Date Delivered: 18 Oct 2012

Judge: R.M. MWONGO

Court: High Court at Mombasa

Parties: LOTUS HOTEL V WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY

Citation: LOTUS HOTEL V WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY[2012] eKLR

Read More

VEVET EPZ LIMITED V SAMEER EPZ LIMITED & Another [2012] eKLR

Case Number: Civil Case 540 of 2012 Date Delivered: 18 Oct 2012

Judge: Jonathan Bowen Havelock

Court: High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts Commercial and Tax Division)

Parties: VEVET EPZ LIMITED v SAMEER EPZ LIMITED & another

Citation: VEVET EPZ LIMITED V SAMEER EPZ LIMITED & Another [2012] eKLR

Read More

PHILIP KIPSIGEI RUTO V DAVID TORE PIRADE & Another [2012] eKLR

Case Number: Civil Case 53 of 2009 Date Delivered: 18 Oct 2012

Judge: RUTH NEKOYE SITATI

Court: High Court at Kisii

Parties: PHILIP KIPSIGEI RUTO v DAVID TORE PIRADE & KINGASUNYE ENOLE LEPORE

Citation: PHILIP KIPSIGEI RUTO V DAVID TORE PIRADE & Another [2012] eKLR

Read More

PATRIOTIC GUARD LIMITED V CHEMELIL SUGAR COMPANY LIMITED[2012]eKLR

Case Number: Civil Case 121 of 2012 Date Delivered: 18 Oct 2012

Judge: ALI-ARONI

Court: High Court at Kisumu

Parties: PATRIOTIC GUARD LIMITED V CHEMELIL SUGAR COMPANY LIMITED

Citation: PATRIOTIC GUARD LIMITED V CHEMELIL SUGAR COMPANY LIMITED[2012] eKLR

Read More

VEVET EPZ LIMITED V SAMEER EPZ LIMITED & Another [2012] eKLR

Case Number: Civil Case 540 of 2012 Date Delivered: 18 Oct 2012

Judge: J.B. Havelock

Court: High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts Commercial and Tax Division)

Parties: VEVET EPZ LIMITED v SAMEER EPZ LIMITED & another

Citation: VEVET EPZ LIMITED V SAMEER EPZ LIMITED & Another [2012] eKLR

Read More

VEVET EPZ LIMITED V SAMEER EPZ LIMITED & Another [2012] eKLR

Case Number: Civil Case 540 of 2012 Date Delivered: 18 Oct 2012

Judge: J.B. Havelock

Court: High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts Commercial and Tax Division)

Parties: VEVET EPZ LIMITED v SAMEER EPZ LIMITED & another

Citation: VEVET EPZ LIMITED V SAMEER EPZ LIMITED & Another [2012] eKLR

Read More

COMMERCIAL BANK OF AFRICA LTD V DAVID NJAU NDUATI[2012]eKLR

Case Number: Civil Case 231 of 2012 Date Delivered: 18 Oct 2012

Judge: J. B. HAVELOCK

Court: High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)

Parties: COMMERCIAL BANK OF AFRICA LTD V DAVID NJAU NDUATI

Citation: COMMERCIAL BANK OF AFRICA LTD V DAVID NJAU NDUATI[2012] eKLR

Read More

PETER OWUOR OTULA V ECOBANK KENYA LIMITED & 3 OTHERS[2012]eKLR

Case Number: Civil Case 100 of 2012 Date Delivered: 18 Oct 2012

Judge: J.M. MUTAVA

Court: High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)

Parties: PETER OWUOR OTULA V ECOBANK KENYA LIMITED & 3 OTHERS

Citation: PETER OWUOR OTULA V ECOBANK KENYA LIMITED & 3 OTHERS[2012] eKLR

Read More

MULGOLD LIMITED V MAIMUNA ABDALLAHI MOHAMED & ANOTHER[2012]eKLR

Case Number: Civil Case 555 of 2011 Date Delivered: 18 Oct 2012

Judge: F. TUIYOTT

Court: High Court at Mombasa

Parties: MULGOLD LIMITED V MAIMUNA ABDALLAHI MOHAMED & ANOTHER[2012]eKLR

Citation: MULGOLD LIMITED V MAIMUNA ABDALLAHI MOHAMED & ANOTHER[2012] eKLR

Read More

World Duty Free Company Limited V Kenya Airports Authority [2012] eKLR

Case Number: Civil Case 372 of 2012 Date Delivered: 17 Oct 2012

Judge: Alfred Mabeya

Court: High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts Commercial and Tax Division)

Parties: World Duty Free Company Limited V Kenya Airports Authority

Citation: World Duty Free Company Limited V Kenya Airports Authority [2012] eKLR

Read More

RICHARD KIMEU NTHENGE V JUBILEE INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED[2012]eKLR

Case Number: Civil Case 426 of 2010 Date Delivered: 17 Oct 2012

Judge: H.P.G. WAWERU

Court: High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)

Parties: RICHARD KIMEU NTHENGE V JUBILEE INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED

Citation: RICHARD KIMEU NTHENGE V JUBILEE INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED[2012] eKLR

Read More

HOSEA KIPLAGAT V JOHN ALLAN OKEMWA [2012] eKLR

Case Number: Civil Case 1413 of 2005 Date Delivered: 17 Oct 2012

Judge: G.V. Odunga

Court: High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)

Parties: HOSEA KIPLAGAT v JOHN ALLAN OKEMWA

Citation: HOSEA KIPLAGAT V JOHN ALLAN OKEMWA [2012] eKLR

Read More

WARIARA MBUGUA V KENNETH PARIT LIKIMANI & 3 OTHERS[2012]eKLR

Case Number: Civil Case 365 of 2011 Date Delivered: 17 Oct 2012

Judge: J.M. NGUGI

Court: High Court at Machakos

Parties: WARIARA MBUGUA V KENNETH PARIT LIKIMANI & 3 OTHERS

Citation: WARIARA MBUGUA V KENNETH PARIT LIKIMANI & 3 OTHERS[2012] eKLR

Read More

DICKENS ODHIAMBO V NATION MEDIA GROUP & 3 OTHERS[2012]eKLR

Case Number: Civil Case 578 of 2009 Date Delivered: 17 Oct 2012

Judge: H.P.G. WAWERU

Court: High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)

Parties: DICKENS ODHIAMBO V NATION MEDIA GROUP & 3 OTHERS

Citation: DICKENS ODHIAMBO V NATION MEDIA GROUP & 3 OTHERS[2012] eKLR

Read More

ZOEA TRANSPORTERS LTD V LUTHERAN WORLD FEDERATION[2012]eKLR

Case Number: Civil Case 668 of 2001 Date Delivered: 17 Oct 2012

Judge: H.P.G. WAWERU

Court: High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)

Parties: ZOEA TRANSPORTERS LTD V LUTHERAN WORLD FEDERATION

Citation: ZOEA TRANSPORTERS LTD V LUTHERAN WORLD FEDERATION[2012] eKLR

Read More