Never seen his humble side like in that interview
dont ever come back mr migunia …nrm and they paid judges must be dealt with
In the era of the #metoo movement, he will be lucky if he ever gets another interview on Canadian TV once his real background is made known
True!!
Finally, a well-prepared interviewer who literally quotes Miguna’s challenge to Matiang’i, then Miguna can only say that Matiang’i arrested him in a way he did not expect.
It confirms why the gaggle of lawyers in full combat regalia camped in Kimaru’s court, and how Matiang’i outwitted them all.
Kwenda ambia bibiako asirudi nyumbani
mboss matusi achia wenyewe
jeneral mar chieth
Slight correction: that is CBC - Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. It averages an audience of less than 1 million viewers.
CBS (Columbia Broadcasting System - USA) averages 12.1 million viewers. Miguna would have to mutilate himself on live TV to edge out Trump and the WWE.
Miguna should go and help the First Nation People of Canada.They have suffered a lot of injustices and are still being discriminated against. It’s time Miguna helped his fellow Canadian citizens instead of giving us Kenyans a headache.
Canada is one of the best countries when it comes to dispensing justice.
Thanks for the correction.
THERE goes the NRM GENERAL again!! The proveb digging your on grave cames into fore. O.K (Let the deconstruct begin.)…Kenya embassy in ottawa should send a lower junior officer to make an inquiry to canada international de affairs office, inregards to (Alleg/) NRM GENERAL wifey, so called, Ms JANE MIGUNA MIGUNA. Privilege of information is not for the highest bidder in north america.
Alipewa chai huko?
Unfortunately si kuskia interview yake so I won’t comment on this thread
Poor guy.
Faced with cases of sexual predatory nature and a pending bankruptcy law suit , things are a mountain in kana nda.
He won the defamation siute and got awarded 10k USDs.
He did not win the actual suit, he abandoned it but was awarded costs on a preliminary ruling, he then abandoned the case having handled it in a matter criticized by the judge, why if he was so innocent?
Although the action was commenced in July, 2004, no statements of defence have yet been delivered. I have concluded that it is time they were.
…
[17] These are very serious allegations, and are, of course, only allegations at this stage of the proceedings. Mr. Miguna fails to establish them at his peril in terms of costs and, possibly, his reputation. For the most part, the allegations are pleaded in an unacceptably bald fashion. However, if appropriately supported by material facts, and proven, they – and other facts pleaded – could support claims for malicious prosecution, breach of the Charter and misfeasance in public office as against the Crown Attorney and Police defendants, and as against the Police defendants alone claims for negligent investigation, unlawful arrest, false imprisonment, and assault and battery. In my view, the plaintiff should be entitled to one more chance to attempt to plead these claims properly.
[68] These allegations are very serious. I reiterate: Mr. Miguna has not proved them yet, and, as previously noted, he fails to prove them at his peril in terms of costs and perhaps his reputation: Miguna No. 1, para. 17. “Proof” is not the issue at this stage, however. I have no hesitation in concluding that, taken as a whole, if they are proved, the facts alleged could form the basis of a finding of liability against Mr. Shallow.
I do agree with the motion judge that paras. 28 through 33 and para. 74 of the fresh amended statement of claim cannot stand. The allegations in those paragraphs are based on Mr. Miguna’s assertion that “he has reason to believe” in the facts set out. As this Court noted in Miguna No. 1, at para. 18, “Mr. Miguna must have knowledge of the facts supporting his claims and not merely plead allegations that he believes may or may not be true.”
…
[101] Mr. Miguna is entitled to his costs here and below, fixed in total for both proceedings at $10,000.00 all inclusive.
2008 ONCA 799 (CanLII) | Miguna v. Toronto Police Services Board | CanLII
He owes at least 180K Canadian Dollars in a case that he lost, on appeal, he was ordered to pay $60K CAD (20K each to 3 respondents)
The appeal is dismissed. Costs are awarded to the respondents in the amount of $20,000 each, inclusive of disbursements and HST.
2016 ONCA 174 (CanLII) | Miguna v. Walmart Canada Corp. | CanLII [
Furthermore, as an experienced lawyer, the plaintiff knew full well that by bringing this action he was exposing himself to the possibility of a significant award of costs. One need look no further than the plaintiff’s own estimate of the costs he has incurred in relation to the action.
…
Taking into account all of the factors indicated above, I have concluded that reasonable awards of costs in favour of the successful parties should be as follows:
a. Wal-Mart Stores - $50,000 (inclusive of disbursements and HST)
b. Consortium - $70,000 (inclusive of disbursements and HST).
2015 ONSC 6835 (CanLII) | Miguna v Walmart Canada | CanLII
:D:D:D:D