Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
Court of AppealAllowedCivil Application E007 of 2026

Machuma v Kalikania

Court of Appeal
19 June 2026
335 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 let a lawyer stop representing a client who disappeared and stopped giving instructions, confirming advocates can exit appeals under Rule 23(2).

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This is a short single-judge ruling of the Court of Appeal at Kakamega delivered by Radido, JA on 19th June 2026. E. O. Kweyu & Co. Advocates, the firm on record for the respondent John Wafula Kalikania, moved the Court by Motion dated 4th May 2026 seeking leave to cease or withdraw from acting for him. The firm explained that the respondent had neither visited its offices nor communicated to give further instructions since the Environment and Land Court at Bungoma (Cherono, J) delivered judgment in Bungoma ELC Appeal No. E033 of 2022 on 23rd May 2025, and that all efforts to trace the respondent had failed. Although the applicant cited no specific rule, the court identified Rule 23(2) of the Court of Appeal Rules, 2022 as the applicable provision, under which a single judge may grant an advocate leave to cease acting, with the advocate deemed to have ceased upon service on the party of a certified copy of the order granting leave. The judge granted leave, directed service of a certified copy of the order on all concerned parties, and made no order as to costs beyond 'costs in the cause'. The ruling does not disturb the decision below and establishes no new precedent beyond confirming the operation of Rule 23(2).

Questions the Court framed

#

The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.

  1. 1.Whether an advocate may be granted leave to cease acting for a party who has not given instructions since judgment below

Key legal issues

#
01

Leave to cease acting for a party

Holding

Leave granted where the party had not communicated or given instructions since the judgment below and could not be traced.

Reasoning

The advocate applied under Rule 23(2) of the Court of Appeal Rules, 2022, which permits a single judge to grant such leave. The respondent had not visited the offices or communicated since the ELC judgment of 23rd May 2025, and efforts to trace him had failed. Leave was granted with directions to serve the certified order.

Legal principles established

#
  • Rule 23(2) of the Court of Appeal Rules, 2022 empowers a single judge to grant an advocate leave to cease acting, with the advocate deemed to have ceased upon service of a certified copy of the order.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Leave granted to the advocate to cease acting for the Respondent
  2. 2.Advocate directed to serve a certified copy of the order on all concerned parties
  3. 3.Costs in the cause

The bench

#

One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.

majority

Wrote the judgment

On appeal from
Environment and Land Court, Bungoma
Bungoma Environment and Land Court Appeal E033 of 2022
Jurisdiction invoked
Rule 23(2) of the Court of Appeal Rules, 2022 (application to a single judge for leave to cease acting)

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.

On the application of the applicant, leave is granted to cease acting for the Respondent. The advocate is directed to serve a certified copy of the order on all concerned parties. Costs in the cause.
p. 1Final orders - leave to cease acting
Under the Rule, the advocate would be deemed to have ceased from acting for the party upon service on the party of a certified copy of the order granting leave to cease from acting.
p. 1Effect of order under Rule 23(2)

Issues in the judgment

#
minor

Caption names Agneta Machuma as applicant, but the body identifies the applicant as E. O. Kweyu & Co. Advocates seeking to cease acting for the Respondent.

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Machuma v Kalikania", Case Analysis (2026). Civil Application E007 of 2026. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2026/2036/eng@2026-06-19

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