[2024] KEELC 13349 (KLR)

[2024] KEELC 13349 (KLR)

The court held that since judgment had already been delivered on 25.7.2024, any change of advocate for the plaintiffs required compliance with Order 9 Rule 9 of the Civil Procedure Rules. The plaintiffs' advocates, Victor Anyango & Company, neither sought leave of the court to come on record nor filed the requisite...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2024] KEELC 13349 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Uwezo City Park Self Help Group & 6 others (on their behalf and on behalf of more than 500 other members of Uwezo City Park Self Help Group, Nairobi County); Defendant: Mohammed Abdulle Ahmad
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment and Land Case Civil Suit 347 of 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Ruling on Application for Stay and Review After Judgment
Outcome
Application struck out with costs to the defendant.
Judges
LN Mbugua
Legal Topics
Change of Advocate Post Judgment, Order 9 Rule 9 Civil Procedure Rules, Review of Judgment, Legal Representative Status
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Land and Property Change of Advocate Post Judgment Order 9 Rule 9 Civil Procedure Rules Review of Judgment Legal Representative Status

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

Uwezo City Park Self Help Group & 6 others (on their behalf and on behalf of more than 500 other members of Uwezo City Park Self Help Group, Nairobi County)

Plaintiff

Mohammed Abdulle Ahmad

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Suit / Ruling on Application for Stay and Review After Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiffs' advocates were properly on record post-judgment as required by Order 9 Rule 9 of the Civil Procedure Rules.
  2. 2 Whether the application for stay and review of judgment was properly before the court given the issue of legal representation.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that since judgment had already been delivered on 25.7.2024, any change of advocate for the plaintiffs required compliance with Order 9 Rule 9 of the Civil Procedure Rules. The plaintiffs' advocates, Victor Anyango & Company, neither sought leave of the court to come on record nor filed the requisite consent with the outgoing advocate. As such, the application for stay and review was filed by an advocate not properly on record, rendering the application incompetent. The court was obligated to address the preliminary issue of legal representation before considering the merits of the application. Consequently, the application dated 12.8.2024 was struck out with costs to the...

Court Disposition

Application struck out with costs to the defendant.

Orders

  • The plaintiffs' application dated 12.8.2024 is struck out.
  • Costs of the application are awarded to the defendant.