[2004] KEHC 2286 (KLR)

[2004] KEHC 2286 (KLR)

The court held that Order 3 Rule 9A of the Civil Procedure Rules is mandatory and applies to appeals, as an appeal is a continuation of the suit. The rule is intended to protect advocates from being replaced without notice after judgment. Since T. K. Kariba Mbabu & Company Advocates were not on record in the lower...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2004] KEHC 2286 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Sonny E. Wanjigi; Respondent: Paradise Safari Park Ltd
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Appeal 165 of 2004
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Application for Stay of Execution; Preliminary Objection
Outcome
Application struck out as incompetent with costs to the respondent.
Legal Topics
Change of Advocate, Order 3 Rule 9a, Authority of Advocate, Appeal Procedure
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Change of Advocate Order 3 Rule 9a Authority of Advocate Appeal Procedure

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sonny E. Wanjigi

Appellant

Paradise Safari Park Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Application for Stay of Execution; Preliminary Objection

  1. 1 Whether an advocate not on record in the lower court can file an application on appeal without leave of the court.
  2. 2 Whether Order 3 Rule 9A of the Civil Procedure Rules applies to appeals.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that Order 3 Rule 9A of the Civil Procedure Rules is mandatory and applies to appeals, as an appeal is a continuation of the suit. The rule is intended to protect advocates from being replaced without notice after judgment. Since T. K. Kariba Mbabu & Company Advocates were not on record in the lower court and had not sought leave of the court to come on record as required, the application for stay of execution was filed without authority. Consequently, the application was incompetent and was struck out with costs to the respondent.

Court Disposition

Application struck out as incompetent with costs to the respondent.

Orders

  • The application for stay of execution is struck out.
  • Costs awarded to the respondent.