[2020] KEHC 1790 (KLR)
The court found that both applications were properly served and remained unopposed. Satisfied with the affidavits of service and the absence of opposition, the court exercised its discretion to grant the orders sought. The court approved John Mulinga Musyoka, as holder of a Power of Attorney, to act for the 1st and...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2020] KEHC 1790 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Muthathi Musyoka Munyambu; Plaintiff: Musyoka Munyambu; Plaintiff: Shadrack Vundi Musyoka; Defendant: County Capital Limited; Defendant: Caroline Mumbi Kibaru; Defendant: Benson Kariuki Ireri
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Case E100 of 2018
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Interlocutory Applications
- Outcome
- Both applications allowed as prayed. No order as to costs.
- Judges
- WA Okwany
- Legal Topics
- Power of Attorney, Representation of Parties, Leave to Cease Acting, Service of Process
- 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
Muthathi Musyoka Munyambu
Plaintiff
Musyoka Munyambu
Plaintiff
Shadrack Vundi Musyoka
Plaintiff
County Capital Limited
Defendant
Caroline Mumbi Kibaru
Defendant
Benson Kariuki Ireri
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Interlocutory Applications
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the court should approve John Mulinga Musyoka, holding a Power of Attorney, to act on behalf of the 1st and 2nd plaintiffs.
- 2 Whether the law firm of Morara Apeim & Nyangito Advocates should be granted leave to cease acting for the defendants.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that both applications were properly served and remained unopposed. Satisfied with the affidavits of service and the absence of opposition, the court exercised its discretion to grant the orders sought. The court approved John Mulinga Musyoka, as holder of a Power of Attorney, to act for the 1st and 2nd plaintiffs, and granted leave to Morara Apeim & Nyangito Advocates to cease acting for the defendants. No order as to costs was made, reflecting the unopposed nature of the applications and the procedural context.
Court Disposition
Both applications allowed as prayed. No order as to costs.
Orders
- Leave is granted to Morara Apeim & Nyangito Advocates to cease acting for the defendants.
- Approval is granted for John Mulinga Musyoka, holding a Power of Attorney from the 1st and 2nd plaintiffs, to act on their behalf in this suit, with effect from the date of filing.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
32 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT NAIROBI
COMMERCIAL AND TAX DIVISION
HCCC NO. E100 OF 2018
MUTHATHI MUSYOKA MUNYAMBU....…1ST PLAINTIFF/APPLICANT
MUSYOKA MUNYAMBU……..................…2ND PLAINTIFF/APPLICANT
SHADRACK VUNDI MUSYOKA.................3RD PLAINTIFF/APPLICANT
-VERSUS-
COUNTY CAPITAL LIMITED..............1ST DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT
CAROLINE MUMBI KIBARU..........…2ND DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT
BENSON KARIUKI IRERI....................3RD DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT
RULING
1. This ruling is in respect to two applications, namely: -
a) The application dated 24th June 2019 wherein the plaintiffs seeks the following orders: -
1. That the honourable court be pleased to approve John Mulinga Musyoka who is holding a Power of Attorney donated by the 1st and 2nd plaintiffs, authorizing him to appear, make applications, sign documents and to testify on behalf of the 1st and 2nd plaintiff herein.
2. That the approval granted by this honourable court be deemed to operate from the date of filing of this suit and consequently the acts undertaken by John Mulinga Musyoka in this suit be deemed as valid;
3. That the costs of this application be provided for.
b) The application dated 29th September 2020 wherein the defendant’s advocates, M/S Morara Apiemu & Nyangito advocatesseek leave to cease acting for the defendants.
2. Both the applications were not opposed despite having been duly served on the respondents.
3. I have perused the affidavit of service dated 21st October 2020 regarding service of the application dated 29th September 2020 on the respondents. I am satisfied that the defendants were duly informed/served with the said application which they have not opposed.
4. Consequently, I grant leave to the law firm of Morara Apeim & Nyangito advocates to cease acting for the defendants herein.
5. Turning to the application dated 24th June 2019, I similarly note that the said application was served on the defendant’s counsel on record and that the said application is also not opposed.
6. I therefore similarly allow the application dated 24th June 2019 as prayed.
7. I make no order as to costs.
Dated, signed and delivered via Microsoft Teams at Nairobi this 12th day of November 2020in view of the declaration of measures restricting court operations due to Coved -19 pandemic and in light of the directions issued by his Lordship, the Chief Justice on the 17th April 2020.
W. A. OKWANY
JUDGE
In the presence of:
Miss Alhman for Nyaburi for Plaintiffs/Applicants
Mr. Muriuki for Morara for defendants
Court Assistant: Silvia