[2025] KEHC 8205 (KLR)

[2025] KEHC 8205 (KLR)

The court found that there was a dispute between the appellant and his insurance company regarding the capacity to withdraw the appeal and the proper advocate on record. The insurance-appointed advocate, Mr. Wamalwa, represented the interests of the insurance company and not the appellant personally. Given the conflict of interest, it was only fair and just to allow the appellant to appoint an independent advocate, Mr. Gachau, to represent him in the dispute concerning the withdrawal of the appeal. The court held that Mr. Gachau was properly on record for the appellant in the application dated 15th May 2025, and that the other issues raised would be addressed in that application.

Citation
[2025] KEHC 8205 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Boniface Kamau Kang’ethe; Respondent: Susan Waithere Kiarie
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Garsen
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
23 May 2025
Case Number
Civil Appeal E006 of 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Representation and Withdrawal of Appeal
Outcome
Mr. Gachau is allowed to be on record for the appellant in the application dated 15th May 2025.
Judges
JN Njagi
Legal Topics
Advocate on Record, Withdrawal of Appeal, Party Representation
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Advocate on Record Withdrawal of Appeal Party Representation

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

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

Parties

Boniface Kamau Kang’ethe

Appellant

Susan Waithere Kiarie

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Ruling on Representation and Withdrawal of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant had capacity to withdraw the appeal after filing a notice to act in person.
  2. 2 Whether Mr. Gachau is properly on record for the appellant in light of the insurance-appointed advocate.
  3. 3 Whether the insurance company's advocate can continue to represent the appellant after a notice of withdrawal.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that there was a dispute between the appellant and his insurance company regarding the capacity to withdraw the appeal and the proper advocate on record. The insurance-appointed advocate, Mr. Wamalwa, represented the interests of the insurance company and not the appellant personally. Given the conflict of interest, it was only fair and just to allow the appellant to appoint an independent advocate, Mr. Gachau, to represent him in the dispute concerning the withdrawal of the appeal. The court held that Mr. Gachau was properly on record for the appellant in the application dated 15th May 2025, and that the other issues raised would be addressed in that application.

Court Disposition

Mr. Gachau is allowed to be on record for the appellant in the application dated 15th May 2025.

Orders

  • Mr. Gachau is allowed to be on record to represent the appellant in the application dated 15th May 2025.