[2021] KECA 383 (KLR)

[2021] KECA 383 (KLR)

The court found that the application by counsel for the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd respondents to cease acting was properly brought under the relevant rules of the Court of Appeal. The supporting affidavit was considered, and there was no opposition to the application. The court held that, in accordance with Rule 23(2) of...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] KECA 383 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Mauricio Marino; Appellant: Amici Miei Ltd; Respondent: Daniel Bernhard; Respondent: Shahim Abdulrehman Adam; Respondent: Khatijabhai Abdulrehman Adam; Respondent: Serabanu Abdulrehman Adam
Court
Court of Appeal
Court Station
Court of Appeal at Mombasa
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Appeal (Application) 85 of 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Application for Leave to Cease Acting
Outcome
application allowed
Judges
KI Laibuta
Legal Topics
Advocate Ceasing to Act, Leave of Court, Court of Appeal Rules, Notice of Motion
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Advocate Ceasing to Act Leave of Court Court of Appeal Rules Notice of Motion

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mauricio Marino

Appellant

Amici Miei Ltd

Appellant

Daniel Bernhard

Respondent

Shahim Abdulrehman Adam

Respondent

Khatijabhai Abdulrehman Adam

Respondent

Serabanu Abdulrehman Adam

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Application for Leave to Cease Acting

  1. 1 Whether counsel for the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd respondents should be granted leave to cease acting for their clients in the appeal.
  2. 2 Whether the application complies with the relevant provisions of the Court of Appeal Rules.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the application by counsel for the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd respondents to cease acting was properly brought under the relevant rules of the Court of Appeal. The supporting affidavit was considered, and there was no opposition to the application. The court held that, in accordance with Rule 23(2) of the Court of Appeal Rules, leave should be granted for counsel to cease acting, effective upon service of the order on the affected respondents. The court also noted that there would be no order as to costs.

Court Disposition

application allowed

Orders

  • Counsel for the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd respondents be deemed as having ceased to act for the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd respondents upon service of this order on them.
  • There be no orders as to costs.