[2008] KEHC 106 (KLR)

[2008] KEHC 106 (KLR)

The court found that the plaintiff's advocate did not possess a valid practicing certificate at the time of preparing and filing the pleadings on 26 and 27 March 2008. The subsequent payment for and issuance of a practicing certificate on 14 April 2008 did not cure the defect, as the law requires an advocate to hold...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2008] KEHC 106 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Dr. Ian Bwosiemo Magara; Plaintiff: Brenda Kwamboka Manwah; Defendant: Future Estates Limited
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Suit 123 of 2008
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Ruling on Application to Review and Set Aside Order Striking Out Suit
Outcome
application dismissed; suit remains struck out
Legal Topics
Striking Out of Suit, Advocate Practicing Certificate, Review of Court Orders, Breach of Sale Agreement
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Land and Property Striking Out of Suit Advocate Practicing Certificate Review of Court Orders Breach of Sale Agreement

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dr. Ian Bwosiemo Magara

Plaintiff

Brenda Kwamboka Manwah

Plaintiff

Future Estates Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Suit / Ruling on Application to Review and Set Aside Order Striking Out Suit

  1. 1 Whether the suit filed by an advocate without a valid practicing certificate is competent and can be sustained.
  2. 2 Whether the court should review and set aside its order striking out the suit for want of a valid practicing certificate.
  3. 3 Whether the subsequent acquisition of a practicing certificate cures the defect at the time of filing.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiff's advocate did not possess a valid practicing certificate at the time of preparing and filing the pleadings on 26 and 27 March 2008. The subsequent payment for and issuance of a practicing certificate on 14 April 2008 did not cure the defect, as the law requires an advocate to hold a valid practicing certificate at the time of filing. The court held that the suit was incompetent ab initio and that there was no error on the part of the court in striking out the proceedings. The application for review and reinstatement was dismissed with costs to the respondent.

Court Disposition

application dismissed; suit remains struck out

Orders

  • The application to review and set aside the order striking out the suit is dismissed with costs to the respondent.
  • The suit remains struck out for want of a valid practicing certificate at the time of filing.