[2013] KEHC 4151 (KLR)
The court found that the petitioner failed to disclose a cause of action as he did not specify how his rights were violated or identify the manner in which the Law Society of Kenya Dress Code infringed on his personal rights and fundamental freedoms. The Council of the Law Society of Kenya is statutorily empowered...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2013] KEHC 4151 (KLR)
- Parties
- Petitioner: Andrew Barney Khakula; Respondent: Law Society of Kenya; Respondent: The Hon Attorney General
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Petition 33 of 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Constitutional Petition / Ruling on Merits
- Outcome
- petition dismissed with costs to the 1st respondent
- Judges
- DAS Majanja
- Legal Topics
- Administrative Action, Advocates Regulation, Dress Code, Right to Fair Administrative Action
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Andrew Barney Khakula
Petitioner
Law Society of Kenya
Respondent
The Hon Attorney General
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Petition / Ruling on Merits
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Law Society of Kenya Dress Code violates Article 47 of the Constitution guaranteeing fair administrative action.
- 2 Whether the Council of the Law Society of Kenya has the authority to issue dress code regulations for advocates.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the petitioner failed to disclose a cause of action as he did not specify how his rights were violated or identify the manner in which the Law Society of Kenya Dress Code infringed on his personal rights and fundamental freedoms. The Council of the Law Society of Kenya is statutorily empowered to regulate the conduct of advocates, including issuing dress codes for court appearances. The petition was therefore deemed frivolous and dismissed with costs to the 1st respondent.
Court Disposition
petition dismissed with costs to the 1st respondent
Orders
- The petition is dismissed as frivolous.
- Costs awarded to the 1st respondent.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
23 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
High Court at Nairobi (Nairobi Law Courts)
Petition 33 of 2013 [if !mso]> <style> v:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} o:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} w:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} .shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);} </style> <![endif]
ANDREW BARNEY KHAKULA................................................... PETITIONER
AND
LAW SOCIETY OF KENYA...........................................1ST RESPONDENT
THE HON ATTORNEY GENERAL ..............................2ND RESPONDENT
RULING
1. When this matter came up for hearing today, 15th April 2013, neither the petitioner nor his advocate appeared in court to prosecute the petition. This was despite the fact that the hearing date was taken by consent and the parties directed to file written submissions. They did not comply with the order and I accordingly directed that the matter do proceed for hearing.
2. According to the petition dated 24th January 2013, the petitioner, an Advocate of the High Court, seeks orders that the Law Society of Kenya Dress Code issued by the Council of the Law Society of Kenya on 21st January 2013 be declared unconstitutional on the basis that it violates Article 47 which guarantees fair administration action.
3. The petition is opposed by the respondents on the basis that the Council of the Law Society is empowered under the provisions of the Advocates Act (Chapter 16 of the Laws of Kenya)and the Law Society of Kenya Act (Chapter 18 of the Laws of Kenya)to issue regulations and directions regulating the conduct of advocates including the manner of dress in court. In so doing, the duly elected Council of the Law Society acts on behalf of the members.
4. What the petitioner seeks from this court is a review of the Advocates Dress Code which is to give guidance to Advocates concerning matters of dressing for purposes of appearance in Court in Kenya. On the material before the court, I am satisfied that the petition does not disclose a cause of action as he does not state how his rights have been violated or identify the manner in which the dress code infringes on his personal rights and fundamental freedoms.
5. The petition is frivolous and is dismissed with costs to the 1st respondent.
DATEDandDELIVEREDatNAIROBIthis 15th day of April 2013.
D.S. MAJANJA
JUDGE
Ms Mungai instructed by KTK Advocates for the 1st respondent.
Mr Mohamed, Litigation Counsel, instructed by the State Law Officer for the 2nd respondent.
[if gte mso 9]><xml>
Normal 0
false false false
EN-ZA X-NONE X-NONE
</xml><![endif][if gte mso 9]><![endif][if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-style-parent:""; text-align:justify; text-indent:-17. 85pt; line-height:200%; font-size:11. 0pt;"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-bidi-"Times New Roman";} </style> <![endif]