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 AppealAllowedNot stated in judgment· [2025] KECA 1798 (KLR)

Vera Chepkirui v Richard Kimeto

Court of Appeal of Kenya
31 October 2025
Mohamed Abdulahi WarsameM. Warsame
289 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 a law firm to formally stop representing an appeal client they had lost contact with, without costs.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This is a short procedural ruling of the Court of Appeal at Nakuru, delivered by M. Warsame, JA on 31st October 2025, on a notice of motion by M/S Bett & Co. Advocates seeking leave to cease acting for the appellant in a pending appeal. The application was supported by an affidavit of Kipkorir Kennedy, which explained that the firm had lost touch with the appellant since filing the notice of appeal on 20th May 2024, and that despite attempts to communicate, no response or further instructions on how to proceed had been received. An affidavit of service confirmed that the application was served on the appellant on 25th October 2024 at her residence in Yagamek village, Bomet; she accepted service but declined to sign. The application was not opposed. The court relied on Rule 23(2) of the Court of Appeal Rules, which allows an advocate who desires to cease acting for a party in a civil appeal or application to apply by notice of motion before a single Judge for leave, with the advocate deemed to have ceased acting upon service of a certified copy of the order. Holding that loss of contact with the client and absence of instructions to prosecute the appeal were sufficient grounds, the court allowed the application, granted the firm leave to cease acting, and made no orders as to costs. This is not a decision on the merits of the appeal, which remains to be prosecuted by the appellant in person.

Key legal issues

#
01

Leave for an advocate to cease acting under Rule 23(2)

Holding

Leave granted where the advocate lost contact with the client and had no instructions to prosecute the appeal.

Reasoning

Rule 23(2) permits an advocate desiring to cease acting for a party in a civil appeal to apply by notice of motion before a single Judge. The affidavit of Kipkorir Kennedy showed the firm had lost touch with the appellant since filing the notice of appeal on 20th May 2024 despite attempts to communicate. Service on the appellant was proved by affidavit of service, and the application was unopposed, making the grounds sufficient.

p. 1

Legal principles established

#
  • Loss of contact with the client and absence of instructions are sufficient grounds to warrant leave for an advocate to cease acting in a civil appeal under Rule 23(2).

Court orders

#
  1. 1.M/S Bett & Co. Advocates granted leave to cease acting for the appellant
  2. 2.No orders as to costs
Jurisdiction invoked
Rule 23(2) of the Court of Appeal Rules

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Vera Chepkirui v Richard Kimeto", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2025/1798/eng@2025-10-31

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