Azhar s/o Mohamed Akram v Singh & 4 others (Civil Application 23 of 2019) [2025] KECA 1763 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Court of Appeal allowed a law firm to stop acting for an unresponsive client, but confirmed a Single Judge cannot stay appeal proceedings.
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 applicant firm should be granted leave to cease acting for the 1st respondent
- 2.Whether proceedings in the appeal should be stayed pending determination of the application
Key legal issues
#Leave for an advocate to cease acting for a client
Where a client has become evasive and failed to give instructions despite repeated correspondence, an advocate is entitled to be granted leave to cease acting
The court reviewed the annexed correspondence showing repeated letters by the firm seeking further instructions that went unanswered, and the deposed breakdown occasioned by unpaid fees of Kshs 2,915,067/=. Satisfied that the client was evasive and unresponsive even after the appeal's reinstatement, the judge found a sufficient case made out for the firm to come off record. The application was allowed in terms of prayers 2 and 3 only.
Jurisdiction of a Single Judge to stay proceedings
A Single Judge of the Court of Appeal has no jurisdiction to order a stay of proceedings
The judge declined to determine the stay prayer on jurisdictional grounds, holding that a Single Judge cannot issue a stay of proceedings. No comment was made on the merits of that prayer, and the application succeeded only on the prayers for leave to cease acting.
Legal principles established
#- A Single Judge of the Court of Appeal lacks jurisdiction to grant a stay of proceedings
Court orders
#- 1.The firm of LJA Associates LLP granted leave to cease acting for the 1st respondent
- 2.The firm of LJA Associates deemed to have ceased acting for the 1st respondent
- 3.No orders as to costs
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- On appeal from
- Court of Appeal of Kenya (the appeal in which this motion was filed; prior dismissal and reinstatement noted)
- not stated in judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Rules 1(2) & 23(2) of the Court of Appeal Rules 2022
Relief refused
#Stay of proceedings pending hearing and determination of the application
The Single Judge of the Court of Appeal lacks jurisdiction to grant a stay of proceedings
Costs
No orders as to costs - each party to bear their own costs of the application; the court stated 'with no orders as to costs as it appears the relationship between the two parties has broken down'
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.
I am satisfied that the applicant has made out a suficient case to cease acting for the 1st respondent and accordingly, I find the application to cease from acting to be merited.
Regarding the prayer for stay of proceedings, this Court sitting as a Single Judge does not have the jurisdiction to issue the same and I will therefore make no comment regarding the same.
the applicant’s motion dated 21st May 2025, is merited and the same is hereby allowed in terms of prayers 2 and 3 only, with no orders as to costs as it appears the relationship between the two parties has broken down and I do not wish to antagonize the parties further by making an order as to costs.
Issues in the judgment
#The name of the 1st respondent is not stated anywhere in the judgment; the case title cannot be fully ascertained
The appeal number in which this motion was filed is not stated in the judgment
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Azhar s/o Mohamed Akram v Singh & 4 others (Civil Application 23 of 2019) [2025] KECA 1763 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Motion on notice dated 21st May 2025 (appeal record number not stated in judgment). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2025/1763/eng@2025-10-24
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.