Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
Court of AppealAllowedNotice of Motion dated 13th November, 2020 (appeal unspecified)· [2020] KECA 44 (KLR)

Njuguna, Kahari and Kiai Advocates v Nairobi City County [2020] KECA 44 (KLR)

Court of Appeal of Kenya
18 December 2020
WKW. Karanja
279 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~1 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

Kenya's Court of Appeal allowed advocates to stop representing Nairobi City County, confirming that a broken relationship of trust is enough grounds to leave a case.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This is a single-judge chambers ruling of the Court of Appeal at Nairobi delivered by W. Karanja, JA, on 18th December 2020. Njuguna, Kahari and Kiai Advocates moved under Rules 1(2) and 23(2) of the Court of Appeal Rules for leave to cease acting for their client, Nairobi City County, in a pending appeal. The application was supported by the affidavit of Joseph Waithaka Kahari, a partner in the firm, deposing to serious irreconcilable differences between the advocates and the client resulting in a complete loss of confidence and trust, rendering the relationship 'perilous and unsustainable'. Although the application was served on the appellant on 12th November 2020 and on the respondents on 5th June 2020, none opposed it. The judge held that, as with a marriage, an advocate-client relationship beset by irreconcilable differences becomes untenable and must be severed. The Notice of Motion dated 13th November 2020 was allowed, leave to come off record was granted, and the court directed that all correspondence and court processes in the appeal be served directly on Nairobi City County until another counsel comes on record. No costs order was made. The ruling has no bearing on the merits of the underlying appeal, which remains pending; it is a short procedural decision with limited precedential weight.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether leave should issue for advocates to come off record

Holding

Leave granted where loss of confidence and trust has rendered the relationship untenable

Reasoning

The court accepted the uncontroverted affidavit evidence of a partner in the firm that irreconcilable differences had destroyed confidence and trust. The application was unopposed despite service on both the client and the respondents. The court analogised the advocate-client relationship to a marriage that must be severed when untenable, and allowed the application with a consequential direction on service.

p. 1

Legal principles established

#
  • Where irreconcilable differences arise between advocate and client, the advocate may be granted leave to cease acting, with service thenceforth effected directly on the client until new counsel comes on record.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The Notice of Motion dated 13th November, 2020 is allowed
  2. 2.Leave granted to the applicant to cease acting for the appellant
  3. 3.Any correspondence or other Court processes in the appeal be served directly on the appellant until another counsel comes on record for it
Jurisdiction invoked
Rules 1(2) and 23(2) of the Court of Appeal Rules

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Njuguna, Kahari and Kiai Advocates v Nairobi City County [2020] KECA 44 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2020). Notice of Motion dated 13th November, 2020 (appeal unspecified). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2020/44/eng@2020-12-18

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.