Mirugi Kariuki & Company Advocates v Wangui (Civil Application E139 of 2025) [2026] KECA 581 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The Court of Appeal allowed a law firm to stop representing a client who stopped giving instructions and paying attention to her own appeal.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether the firm of Mirugi Kariuki & Co. Advocates should be granted leave to cease acting for the respondent in the appeal
Key legal issues
#Whether leave should be granted to an advocate to cease acting for a client who has failed to give instructions or cooperate in prosecuting an appeal
Leave was granted: the client's failure to furnish instructions and lack of interest broke down the advocate-client relationship, making continued representation impractical.
The court noted the unopposed application and restated the general principles: courts allow advocates to cease acting where the relationship has broken down, where instructions are not provided, where the client is uncooperative or stops communicating, provided the administration of justice is not prejudiced, since an advocate cannot be forced to act against their will. On those facts, the application was for allowing.
Legal principles established
#- Under Rule 23(2) of the Court of Appeal Rules, 2022, an advocate wishing to cease acting for a party in a civil appeal must apply by notice of motion before a single Judge, and is deemed to have ceased acting upon service of a certified copy of the order on the party.
- A court will allow an advocate to cease acting where the advocate-client relationship has broken down, the client fails to give instructions or is persistently uncooperative, provided the administration of justice is not prejudiced, since an advocate cannot be compelled to act against their will.
Court orders
#- 1.The firm of Mirugi Kariuki & Company Advocates granted leave to cease acting for the respondent (the appellant in Nakuru COACA No. E016 of 2021, Ruth Mary Wangui v Peter David Kaime & 2 others)
- 2.No orders as to costs
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Rule 23(2) of the Court of Appeal Rules, 2022
Quotable passages
#Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.
Generally, a court will allow an advocate's application to cease acting for a client when the advocate-client relationship has broken down to the point where continued representation is impractical, unethical or amounts to forced servitude or where the client has failed to provide necessary instructions
The firm of Mirugi Kariuki & company advocates be and is hereby granted leave to cease acting for the respondent (the appellant in Nakuru COACA No. E016 of 2021, Ruth Mary Wangui v Peter David Kaime & 2 others,
No orders as to costs.
Issues in the judgment
#The case number and parties of the application before the court are not stated in the header; they must be inferred from the body and final orders.
The judgment refers to 'the applicants' and 'the respondent' inconsistently, describing the firm as applicant but also as 'the applicants' in the grounds.
The firm's submissions cite decisions of the Court on cessation of representation, but no decision is named, so no authorities can be recorded.
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Mirugi Kariuki & Company Advocates v Wangui (Civil Application E139 of 2025) [2026] KECA 581 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2026/581/eng@2026-03-17
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.