Mwaruwa v Jembe & another (Environment and Land Case E043 of 2023) [2026] KEELC 3271 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan land court struck out an attempt to revive a dismissed suit because the new lawyer filed papers without first getting the court's permission.
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 application dated 8th October 2025 to set aside the orders of 29th September 2025 dismissing the suit for want of prosecution should be allowed
- 2.Whether the firm of T.A. Chacha and Associates was properly on record for the plaintiffs
- 3.Whether the preliminary objection that the incoming firm was not properly on record had merit
Key legal issues
#Whether the new advocates were properly on record
The firm of T.A. Chacha and Associates was not properly on record; without leave under Order 9 Rule 9 their application was incompetent and was struck out
After dismissal of the suit there is deemed to be a judgment against the plaintiffs, triggering Order 9 Rule 9, which requires a new advocate to apply to court for leave to come on record and represent a party. T.A. Chacha and Associates filed the application without such leave, and their purported representation violated the rule, rendering the motion incompetent.
Whether the application to set aside dismissal for want of prosecution should be granted
The court did not reach the merits, striking out the application on the ground of the applicants' incompetent representation
The second respondent opposed, arguing the firm filing was not properly on record, had failed to disclose which firm it replaced, and had not served that firm; also that no evidence showed the former advocate had joined the DPP's office and the year-long delay showed disinterest. The court disposed of the matter on the representation point alone.
Legal principles established
#- Once a suit is dismissed, a deemed judgment exists against the plaintiffs and any new advocate must obtain leave of court before coming on record under Order 9 Rule 9
- Representation by an advocate who has not obtained leave under Order 9 Rule 9 renders proceedings filed by that advocate a nullity/incompetent
Court orders
#- 1.The application dated 8th October 2025 is struck out with no orders as to costs
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Inherent jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court over its own suit; Civil Procedure Rules, Order 9 Rule 9
Relief refused
#Setting aside of the orders of 29th September 2025 dismissing the suit for want of prosecution
The application was incompetent because the firm of T.A. Chacha and Associates came on record without leave of court as required by Order 9 Rule 9 after the suit had been dismissed
Costs
No orders as to costs
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.
The suit having been dismissed, there is deemed to be a judgment against the plaintifis, and consequently, the provisions of Order 9 Rule 9 kick in.
No leave of court having been sought for them to come onto the record and represent the plaintifis, their purported representation of the applicants in the present matter is in violation of the provisions of Order 9 Rule 9.
Consequently, the application dated 8th October 2025 is incompetent and it is here by struck out with no orders to costs.
Issues in the judgment
#The parties, suit number and cause of action are not identified anywhere in the judgment; the ruling refers only to 'the application dated 8th October 2025' and an unnamed suit
The judgment notes a preliminary objection that was apparently not addressed, yet disposes of the matter on the same ground without expressly ruling on it
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Mwaruwa v Jembe & another (Environment and Land Case E043 of 2023) [2026] KEELC 3271 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Application dated 8th October 2025. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/3271/eng@2026-04-20
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.