[2025] KECA 1047 (KLR)
The court held that the application by M/S Harrison Kinyanjui & Company Advocates to cease acting for the appellant was not properly served on the client as required by law. The court found that the evidence provided—emails and WhatsApp messages informing the client of the advocate's intention—did not amount to...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2025] KECA 1047 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: John Mathara Mwangi; Respondent: Consolidated Bank of Kenya Limited; Respondent: Commercial Mart Limited; Respondent: Joseph Kariuki t/a Josrick Merchants Auctioneers; Respondent: Chief Land Registrar; Applicant: M/S Harrison Kinyanjui & Company Advocates
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Court Station
- Court of Appeal at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Appeal (Application) E104 of 2021
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Application to Cease Acting by Advocate
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Judges
- W Karanja
- Legal Topics
- Advocate Ceasing to Act, Service of Process, Affidavit of Service
- 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
John Mathara Mwangi
Appellant
Consolidated Bank of Kenya Limited
Respondent
Commercial Mart Limited
Respondent
Joseph Kariuki t/a Josrick Merchants Auctioneers
Respondent
Chief Land Registrar
Respondent
M/S Harrison Kinyanjui & Company Advocates
Applicant
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Application to Cease Acting by Advocate
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the application by the advocate to cease acting for the appellant was properly served on the client as required by law.
- 2 Whether evidence of email and WhatsApp communication constitutes sufficient service of the application to cease acting.
- 3 Whether an affidavit of service is mandatory before the application to cease acting can be considered.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that the application by M/S Harrison Kinyanjui & Company Advocates to cease acting for the appellant was not properly served on the client as required by law. The court found that the evidence provided—emails and WhatsApp messages informing the client of the advocate's intention—did not amount to service of the application itself. There was no affidavit of service filed to demonstrate that the application had been served on the appellant. The court reiterated that compliance with the requirement of service and filing of an affidavit of service is mandatory before such an application can be considered. As a result, the application was not allowed to proceed.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The application by M/S Harrison Kinyanjui & Company Advocates to cease acting for the appellant is dismissed.
- The applicant is at liberty to file another application seeking similar orders, provided that proper service is effected and an affidavit of service is filed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
31 paragraphs
Mwangi v Consolidated Bank of Kenya Limited & 3 others; M/S Harrison Kinyanjui & Company Advocates (Applicant) (Civil Appeal (Application) E104 of 2021) [2025] KECA 1047 (KLR) (11 June 2025) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2025] KECA 1047 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Court of Appeal at Nairobi
Civil Appeal (Application) E104 of 2021
W Karanja, JA
June 11, 2025
Between
John Mathara Mwangi
Appellant
and
Consolidated Bank of Kenya Limited
1st Respondent
Commercial Mart Limited
2nd Respondent
Joseph Kariuki t/a Josrick Merchants Auctioneers
3rd Respondent
Chief Land Registrar
4th Respondent
and
M/S Harrison Kinyanjui & Company Advocates
Applicant
(Being an application to cease acting for the appellant in an appeal from a ruling of the High Court (D.S. Majanja, J.) delivered on 10th February 2021 in Nairobi Commercial & Tax Division Civil Case No. 162 of 2019)
Ruling
1. On 10th February 2025, my sister Mumbi Ngugi, JA. dismissed the applicant’s Notice of Motion seeking leave to cease acting for the appellant herein. The learned Judge found no evidence of service of the application on the applicant and dismissed the motion and directed that the applicant was at liberty to file another application seeking similar orders but with a rider that the applicant ensures service of the application on his client.
2. The firm of Harrison Kinyanjui Advocates have filed a similar application, but the question is, was the notice of motion dated 15th April 2024 served on the appellant?
3. At paragraph 5 of the application by learned counsel Mr. Harrison Kinyanjui on 15th April 2025, he deposes as follows:-I have repeatedly informed the appellant via email and WhatsApp messages of my law firm’s intent to cease acting absent his grant of instructions/further instructions on the matter without any response inspite of the mail and WhatsApp messages being delivered to the appellant ”
4. One such email is attached to Mr. Kinyanjui’s affidavit.
5. In my view, however, this email does not amount to evidence of service of the application itself. There is no affidavit of service filed. I find no compliance with the direction by Mumbi Ngugi, JA.
6. I reiterate that the application to cease acting must be served on the client and an affidavit of service to that effect be filed in Court before the application can be re-listed for hearing.
DATED AND DELIVERED AT NAIROBI THIS 11TH DAY OF JUNE 2025. W. KARANJA...........................................JUDGE OF APPEALI certify that this is a true copy of the original.SignedDEPUTY REGISTRAR