The Parklands Diary

                                                          Image on Google            I.                    Introduction  Climate Change discussions are so pertinent in today’s society. This owes to the fact that the manifestations of climate change such as droughts, storms, floods and extreme warm temperatures endangers the survival of humanity and planetary development. These consequences result in conflicts which have led to scholars and professors calling climate change a conflict multiplier and amplifier. These disputes mainly arise from the competition to acquire resources necessary for addressing the disasters caused by climate change. Consequently, these conflicts call for their resolution. Traditionally, litigation was the only mechanism used to resolve climate change disputes and conflicts. However, this mechanism proved to be deficient due to case backlogs and delays. This in return raised concerns on the best alternative mechanisms appropriate to resolve the conflicts ari

                                                          Image on Google Human beings are the pre-eminent social animal on the planet, and we depend on our ability to communicate with others for survival and success. Speech allows us to express our ideas and our viewpoints on different subject matters, and reach a consensus on how to navigate this complex and ever-changing world. It is against this backdrop that national and international law guarantee the right to freedom of expression, to seek and impart knowledge and ideas in numerous forms. The justifications for freedom of expression are relatively straightforward: free discussion allows citizens to be exposed to a range of ideas, resulting in better judgements and thereafter tangible economic benefits. Further, curtailing freedom of expression is an infringement on the individual’s autonomy and dignity. Collectively, it is the hand maiden in the discovery of the truth, as it provides a reasonable balance between stability and

                                                                 Image on Google Recap on nyutu agrovet case   A deliberation on whether an Appeal for an Arbitral Award should be final at the High Court or Court of Appeal. What is Arbitration? Kariuki Muigua defines arbitration as one of the mechanisms that are commonly referred to as alternative dispute resolution mechanisms (ADR). [1] These mechanisms are set out under Article 33 of the United Nations Charter which provides that parties to a dispute shall first seek to resolve it through negotiation, inquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements, or other peaceful means of their own choice. [2] Arbitration itself is the procedure in which a dispute is submitted, by agreement of the parties to one or more arbitrators who make a binding decision on the dispute. [3] Arbitration in Kenya is recognized mainly by the Constitution

                                                        Image from Google Introduction In the ever-evolving landscape of dispute resolution, a potent alternative has emerged, offering swifter, cost-effective, and more flexible solutions than traditional litigation. Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) is a methodology gaining substantial traction, driven not only by its advantages but also by a robust legal framework that supports its implementation. Embedded within the legal fabric of Kenya, ADR draws its strength from Article 159 of the Constitution, which underscores the principles of justice, equity, fairness, and transparency. This constitutional foundation serves as a cornerstone for the promotion of ADR as a legitimate means of settling disputes. The Arbitration Act of 1995 further solidifies the foundation for ADR by providing a comprehensive framework for arbitration proceedings. It empowers parties to resolve disputes outside the courtroom, placing control firmly in the

                                                      Image on Freepik On Saturday, 27 th January 2024, thousands of women marched in the capital to protest against the alarming rise of violence against women after a series of women’s murders rocked the country. This marked the first and the largest anti-femicide demonstration in the country that saw women and feminists take to the streets to march against the rising cases of femicide. Femicide is one of the most extreme forms of gender-based violence in Kenya. It is defined as the intentional killing of women and girls just by their nature of being women. It lays its distinction from other forms of murder or harm by the specific target it has on women just because of their gender. The major causes of this enigma are firmly established in societal norms and the way of life. These include; the lower position women are placed in by society, discrimination, gender imbalance in social roles, unequal distribution of power and resources

                                                            Image on Freepik Introduction : The intersection of artificial intelligence (AI) and legal liability has become an increasingly difficult terrain to navigate, especially concerning the actions of AI chatbots. As technology advances, the legal landscape grapples with novel challenges, and one such concern revolves around the potential liability for misrepresentation by AI chatbots. This discussion delves into the complex legal issues surrounding misrepresentation through AI chatbots, employing a focused analysis of the British Columbia Civil Resolution Tribunal (BCCRT) decision in the case of Moffat v Air Canada (2024 BCCRT 149). The use of AI chatbots in various industries has proliferated, offering efficient and automated user interactions. However, this surge in technological reliance has raised questions about accountability when such AI entities are involved in misleading or inaccurate communications. The case of Mof