[2005] KEHC 564 (KLR)
The court found that the conduct of the respondent's counsel, Mr. Ngatia, in repeatedly challenging the court's authority and confronting the judge after adverse rulings, constituted an abuse of the court process and a breach of the duty of courtesy owed by counsel to the court. The judge emphasized that such...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2005] KEHC 564 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Kalyasoi Farmers Co-operative Society; Plaintiff: Samwel Kipkemoi Langat; Plaintiff: Jonathan Kipkorir Bore; Plaintiff: Nicholas Kimeto; Plaintiff: Francis Kimutai Maritim; Plaintiff: Stanley Kibet Kirinyet; Plaintiff: Joseph Kipkoske Kilele; Defendant: County Council of Narok
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Case 664 of 2005
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Case / Formal Caution and Judicial Reprimand Following Interlocutory Rulings
- Outcome
- Court's displeasure at counsel's conduct formally recorded; caution issued to counsel.
- Legal Topics
- Court Conduct, Contempt of Court, Judicial Authority
- 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
Kalyasoi Farmers Co-operative Society
Plaintiff
Samwel Kipkemoi Langat
Plaintiff
Jonathan Kipkorir Bore
Plaintiff
Nicholas Kimeto
Plaintiff
Francis Kimutai Maritim
Plaintiff
Stanley Kibet Kirinyet
Plaintiff
Joseph Kipkoske Kilele
Plaintiff
County Council of Narok
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Case / Formal Caution and Judicial Reprimand Following Interlocutory Rulings
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether counsel's conduct amounted to abuse of court process and discourtesy to the court.
- 2 Whether the court should formally record its displeasure and caution counsel regarding future conduct.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the conduct of the respondent's counsel, Mr. Ngatia, in repeatedly challenging the court's authority and confronting the judge after adverse rulings, constituted an abuse of the court process and a breach of the duty of courtesy owed by counsel to the court. The judge emphasized that such conduct, if persistent, may warrant sanctions as provided by law. The court formally recorded its displeasure and issued a caution to counsel, making clear that such behavior would not be tolerated in future proceedings.
Court Disposition
Court's displeasure at counsel's conduct formally recorded; caution issued to counsel.
Orders
- The court records its displeasure at the conduct of Mr. F. Ngatia during the court session of 22nd June, 2005.
- A formal caution is issued to counsel that such conduct will not be tolerated in future.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
28 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI Civil Case 664 of 2005 (1)
KALYASOI FARMERS CO-OPERATIVE
SOCIETY . ………………………………..……………...…1ST PLAINTIFF/APPLICANT
SAMWEL KIPKEMOI LANGAT………....…………..…...2ND PLAINTIFF/APPLICANT
JONATHAN KIPKORIR BORE…………..…...…………3RD PLAINTIFF/APPLICANT
NICHOLAS KIMETO……………………...…………..…..4TH PLAINTIFF/APPLICANT
FRANCIS KIMUTAI MARITIM………….....……………..5TH PLAINTIFF/APPLICANT
STANLEY KIBET KIRINYET…………….....……………6TH PLAINTIFF/APPLICANT
JOSEPH KIPKOSKE KILELE…………….………….....7TH PLAINTIFF/APPLICANT
-VERSUS-
COUNTY COUNCIL OF NAROK……………………. DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT
COURTESY IN COURT:
A FORMAL CAUTION TO COUNSEL
I did hint earlier in my ruling that it behoves me to sound a word of caution to counsel, in the light of unbecoming conduct which came to pass, as I conducted Court process in this matter.
The several rulings which I had to make, and which were necessitated by objections put up by counsel for the respondent, became themselves the occasion for challenge to my judicial authority. When I gave a ruling on 20th June, 2005 counsel for the respondent sought and was granted leave to lodge an appeal. However, when he did not win on a precursory application to the Court of Appeal, and was directed to return before me for the continued hearing of the contempt application against his client, on 22nd June, 2005 he still had a quibble to raise, and which led me to make a ruling. Apparently miffed by my ruling, he confronted me, instead of seeking leave to appeal against that ruling. He let fall these words:
“You should recuse yourself. On more than one occasion you have held that this contempt application must be heard in priority over everything the defendant would wish to raise.”
So, what learned counsel had failed to convince the appellate Court to grant his client by lawful order, he was now contriving to claw back by his sheer bravado and guts! It was an undisguised show of discourtesy and was, in my view, the archetypal abuse of the process of the Court.
I wish to state that all counsel have a duty of courtesy when they appear in Court, and persistent failure to observe this practice may, in an appropriate case, occasion the application of the sanctions provided by law.
I hereby record the Court’s displeasure at the conduct of learned counsel, Mr. F. Ngatia, during the Court session of 22nd June, 2005 and signal that such conduct is not again to be endured.
DATED and DELIVERED at Nairobi this 2nd day of December, 2005.
J.B. OJWANG
JUDGE
Coram: J.B. Ojwang
Court Clerk: Mwangi
Present: (1) Counsel for the Defendant/Respondent: Mr. Ngatia
(2) Counsel for the 1st, 2nd, 3rd Plaintiffs: Mr. Kemboy
(3) Counsel for the 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th Plaintiffs: Mr. Katwa