[1999] KEHC 163 (KLR)

[1999] KEHC 163 (KLR)

The court held that the Law Society of Kenya is not a party to the proceedings unless specifically named, as it is distinct from the Disciplinary Committee. Service of notice upon the Law Society was therefore improper. Furthermore, even if the Law Society were considered a party, the orders sought by the appellant...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[1999] KEHC 163 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: C.M. Ndolo; Respondent: Mwamburi Mwacheda
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
? 27 of 1998
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Preliminary Objection
Outcome
preliminary objection upheld; application dismissed with costs
Judges
A Mbogholi-Msagha
Legal Topics
Preliminary Objection, Party Joinder, Service of Process
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Preliminary Objection Party Joinder Service of Process

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

C.M. Ndolo

Appellant

Mwamburi Mwacheda

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Ruling on Preliminary Objection

  1. 1 Whether the Law Society of Kenya is a proper party to the appeal and should be served with notice.
  2. 2 Whether the orders sought by the appellant can be granted on an interlocutory application after sentence has commenced.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the Law Society of Kenya is not a party to the proceedings unless specifically named, as it is distinct from the Disciplinary Committee. Service of notice upon the Law Society was therefore improper. Furthermore, even if the Law Society were considered a party, the orders sought by the appellant could not be granted on an interlocutory application after the sentence had commenced, as only the appellate court has jurisdiction to address such prayers. The preliminary objection was thus upheld, and the application failed on both procedural and substantive grounds.

Court Disposition

preliminary objection upheld; application dismissed with costs

Orders

  • The preliminary objection is allowed with costs to the objector.
  • Order accordingly.