[2024] KECA 1742 (KLR)

[2024] KECA 1742 (KLR)

The application by the respondent's advocates to cease acting was dismissed because the applicant failed to demonstrate that the application or the intention to cease acting had been served on the client, as required by rule 23(2) of the Court of Appeal Rules, 2022. The court emphasized that while an advocate-client...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2024] KECA 1742 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: John Kiptoo Lagat; Respondent: National Oil Corporation of Kenya
Court
Court of Appeal
Court Station
Court of Appeal at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Appeal (Application) 35 of 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application by Advocate to Cease Acting
Outcome
application dismissed
Judges
M Ngugi
Legal Topics
Advocate Ceasing to Act, Notice of Motion, Service on Client, Court of Appeal Rules
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Advocate Ceasing to Act Notice of Motion Service on Client Court of Appeal Rules

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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John Kiptoo Lagat

Appellant

National Oil Corporation of Kenya

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application by Advocate to Cease Acting

  1. 1 Whether the advocate for the respondent can be granted leave to cease acting without evidence of service of the application on the client.
  2. 2 What is the proper procedure under the Court of Appeal Rules for an advocate seeking to cease acting for a party.

Ratio Decidendi

The application by the respondent's advocates to cease acting was dismissed because the applicant failed to demonstrate that the application or the intention to cease acting had been served on the client, as required by rule 23(2) of the Court of Appeal Rules, 2022. The court emphasized that while an advocate-client relationship may be terminated when it becomes untenable, the client must be notified of the advocate's intention to withdraw. The absence of evidence of service on the client was fatal to the application, and the court could not grant the orders sought without compliance with the procedural requirement of notice.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The application dated 26th October 2023 is dismissed with no order as to costs.
  • The applicant is at liberty to file another application upon compliance with the requirement for service on the client.