SheriaNet for Android — search and read Kenyan case law from your phone, offline.
Join the beta →

Kamau v Itumbi (Civil Case E231 of 2021) [2023] KEHC 18422 (KLR) (Civ) (2 June 2023) (Ruling)

[2023] KEHC 18422 (KLR) High Court of Kenya
Read PDF
Court
High Court of Kenya
Case number
18422
Citation
[2023] KEHC 18422 (KLR)
Decided
2 June 2023
Beta Machine-generated summary. Automatically produced by AI from the judgment text — it may be incomplete or inaccurate. Always verify against the full judgment below. Not legal advice.

Summary at a glance

TypeCivilPostureAppeal from the High Court, NairobiCoramJ.N. NJAGI
The High Court has unlimited original jurisdiction in civil matters, including defamation cases, and thus has jurisdiction to hear the Plaintiff's application.

Facts

The Plaintiff, Mike Maina Kamau, filed a defamation suit against the Defendant, Dennis Itumbi, seeking an injunction to prevent the Defendant from making defamatory statements and publishing defamatory posts on social media.

Issues

  • Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to hear the defamation suit.
  • Whether the orders sought by the Plaintiff are merited or should be discharged.

Reasoning

The court held that the High Court's jurisdiction is derived from the Constitution and cannot be limited by the Civil Procedure Act.

Outcome

The Plaintiff's application for an injunction was granted.

Orders

  • A temporary injunction was issued directed at the Defendant to restrain him from making defamatory statements and publishing defamatory posts on social media.
  • A mandatory injunction was issued directed at the Defendant to pull down the defamatory Facebook and Twitter posts published in his accounts @OleItumbi and @DennisItumbi.

Remedies

  • Injunctions to prevent the Defendant from making defamatory statements and publishing defamatory posts.

Authorities cited

Legislation (2)
  • Article 165(3) of the Constitution
  • Section 11 of the Civil Procedure Act
Cases cited (1)
  • Selina Vukinu Ambe v Ketan Shashikant Khatri (2020) eKLR
⚠ This summary is experimental and generated by a language model, not a lawyer. It can contain errors, omissions, or misinterpretations and must not be relied on for legal decisions. The authoritative source is the full judgment. Please confirm every point against the original before use.
Full judgment 0.3 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case