[2024] KESC 9 (KLR)

Source-derived case information.

Citation: [2024] KESC 9 (KLR)
Parties: Appellant: Harcharan Singh Sehmi; Appellant: Jaswarana Sehmi; Respondent: Tarabana Company Limited; Respondent: Rospatech Limited; Respondent: Chief Land Registrar, Nairobi; Respondent: Inspector General of Police; Respondent: Land Commission; Respondent: The Attorney General; Applicant: Mbugua Ng’ang’a & Co. Advocates
Court: Supreme Court
Court Station: Supreme Court of Kenya
Jurisdiction: Kenya
Case Number: Petition (Application) E033 of 2023
Procedural Posture: Miscellaneous Application / Application for Leave to Cease Acting
Outcome: Application allowed. Leave granted for applicant to cease acting for 2nd respondent. Costs to be borne by 2nd respondent.
Judges: SC Wanjala
Legal Topics: Advocate Ceasing to Act, Leave to Withdraw, Service of Application, Uncontested Application
Source Language: en

Civil Procedure Advocate Ceasing to Act Leave to Withdraw Service of Application Uncontested Application

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 2 Party arguments 2

Parties

Harcharan Singh Sehmi

Appellant

Jaswarana Sehmi

Appellant

Tarabana Company Limited

Respondent

Rospatech Limited

Respondent

Chief Land Registrar, Nairobi

Respondent

Inspector General of Police

Respondent

Land Commission

Respondent

The Attorney General

Respondent

Mbugua Ng’ang’a & Co. Advocates

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Application for Leave to Cease Acting

Legal Issues

1 Whether the applicant firm should be granted leave to cease acting for the 2nd respondent due to lack of instructions and contact.
2 Whether proper service of the application to cease acting was effected on the 2nd respondent.
3 Whether costs of the application should be borne by the 2nd respondent.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant, Mbugua Ng’ang’a & Co. Advocates, had demonstrated that the 2nd respondent had ceased contact and failed to provide instructions, making it impossible for the firm to continue acting. The application was properly served on the 2nd respondent through electronic means as permitted by the Supreme Court Rules. The application was uncontested by any party. The court held that it cannot compel an advocate to continue acting for a party who has lost touch or interest in the matter. Accordingly, the court granted leave for the applicant to cease acting for the 2nd respondent and ordered that the costs of the application be borne by the 2nd respondent.

Court Disposition

Application allowed. Leave granted for applicant to cease acting for 2nd respondent. Costs to be borne by 2nd respondent.

Orders

The Notice of Motion dated 31st January 2024, and lodged on 8th February 2024, is hereby allowed.
The Firm of M/s Mbugua Ng’ang’a & Co. Advocates is granted leave to cease acting for the 2nd respondent.

Full Case Text

Judgment text and source record

36 paragraphs

Sehmi & another v Tarabana Company Limited & 5 others; Mbugua Ng’ang’a & Co. Advocates (Applicant) (Petition (Application) E033 of 2023) [2024] KESC 9 (KLR) (12 April 2024) (Ruling)

Neutral citation: [2024] KESC 9 (KLR)

Republic of Kenya

In the Supreme Court of Kenya

Petition (Application) E033 of 2023

SC Wanjala, J

April 12, 2024

Between

Harcharan Singh Sehmi

1st Appellant

Jaswarana Sehmi

2nd Appellant

and

Tarabana Company Limited

1st Respondent

Rospatech Limited

2nd Respondent

Chief Land Registrar, Nairobi

3rd Respondent

Inspector General of Police

4th Respondent

Land Commission

5th Respondent

The Attorney General

6th Respondent

and

Mbugua Ng’ang’a & Co. Advocates

Applicant

((Being an application by M/s Mbugua Ng’ang’a & Co. Advocates to cease acting for the 2nd respondent)

Ruling

Representation:Mr. Shama h/b for Mr. George Mbugua Ng’ang’a for the applicant (Mbugua Ng’ang’a & Co. Advocates)Mr. Mumo h/b for Mr. David Njoroge for the 1st and 2nd appellants (Igeria & Ngugi Advocates)Mr. Khayega Chivai for the 1st respondent (Kipkorir Cheruiyot Chivai & Kigen Advocates)Mr. Allan Kamau for the 3rd, 5th and 6th respondents (State Counsel Office of the Attorney General) 1. Uponperusing the Motion dated 31st January 2024 and lodged on 8th February 2024 brought pursuant to Rule 18 (6) and (7) of the Supreme Court Rules, 2020 seeking the following orders, that: the firm of Mbugua Ng’ang’a & Company Advocates (hereinafter, ‘the firm’) be granted leave to cease from acting for Rospatech Limited; and costs of this application be provided; and 2. Uponreading the affidavit in support of the Motion sworn by George Ng’ang’a Mbugua, Advocate on 31st January 2024, wherein, he depones that his client, the 2nd respondent herein, has ceased contact and that despite several reminders, has failed to give him proper instructions and is therefore unable to proceed with the Petition; and

3. Uponconsidering the applicant’s written submissions dated 7th February 2024, and filed on 8th February 2024, as well as the Affidavit of Service sworn on 13th February 2024, in which Counsel submits that the 2nd respondent was served with the present application and its attendant directions electronically on 12th February 2024, through its Director Martin Njuguna on WhatsApp via his last known telephone number and email address, pursuant to Section 16 of the Supreme Court Rules 2020; and

4. Bearing in mindthat the application was served upon all other parties and is uncontested, and further considering that Section 23(2)(g) of the Supreme Court Act, 2011 grants a single Judge jurisdiction to determine the application in the following terms:23. Exercise of powers of the Court(2)A single judge may hear and determine an application for the following preliminary procedures—(g)withdrawal of an advocate to cease acting for a party;

5. I opinethat, a court of law cannot compel counsel to continue acting for a party, who has lost touch or interest in the matter for whatever reason.

6. Accordingly, I now make the following Orders:a.The Notice of Motion dated 31st January 2024, and lodged on 8th February 2024, is hereby allowed.b.Consequently, the Firm of M/s Mbugua Ng’ang’a & Co. Advocates, is hereby granted leave to cease acting for the 2nd respondent;c.The costs of this application shall be borne by the 2nd respondent.It is so Ordered.

DATED AND DELIVERED AT NAIROBI THIS 12TH DAY OF APRIL 2024. .............................S. C. WANJALAJUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURTI certify that this is a true copy of the originalREGISTRAR,SUPREME COURT OF KENYA

About this LexChat collection

Publisher and coverage

LexChat is published by Esheria. Coverage reflects the case law currently mapped from identified source collections; it may be incomplete, delayed, or later corrected. The official source controls where it differs from this research page.

AI and research method

Source-derived facts are shown separately from AI-generated material. If an AI summary is available, it is explicitly labelled and remains a non-authoritative research aid.

Corrections and reporting

Report a source mismatch, factual issue, personal-data concern, or licensing question to support@esheria.co.ke. Include this page's URL and the supporting official source so the record can be reviewed, corrected, restricted, or withdrawn.

Legal-information disclaimer

LexChat provides legal information and research tools, not legal advice. Verify currency, status, citations, and jurisdiction with authoritative sources and a qualified professional where appropriate.