AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCOtherNot stated in judgment· [2019] KEELC 405 (KLR)
Dalco Trading Centre v Kamaita Imathiu & 3 others [2019] KEELC 405 (KLR)
AI-assisted case brief
·~2 min to read original · ~4 min briefThe bottom line
#A Kenyan law firm sought court permission to stop acting for an uncooperative client, but withdrew the application and continued with the case.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#The firm of M/S Kiogora Ariithi & Associates Advocates, acting for the 3rd defendant in a suit before the High Court at Chuka, filed an application dated 10th December 2019 under Section 3A of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 9 Rule 13 of the Civil Procedure Rules, 2010, seeking leave to cease acting for the 3rd defendant, with costs of the application provided for. The application was grounded on two assertions: that the 3rd defendant had ceased cooperating with his advocates in the suit, and had failed to furnish instructions, rendering the advocate unable to continue acting. It was supported by an affidavit of Julius Kiogora Ariithi sworn on 10th December 2019, in which he confirmed he had been conducting the suit for the 3rd defendant, that the client had ceased cooperating and failed to heed his professional advice, and that the lack of cooperation left him unable to proceed. When the application came up on 16th December 2019, M/S Nyambura Kithaka informed the court that Mr. Kiogora Ariithi had decided to withdraw the application and continue representing the 3rd defendant. In consequence, Justice P. M. Njoroge marked the application withdrawn with no order as to costs. No merits were determined, no substantive orders were issued, and the advocate-client relationship remained intact.
Key legal issues
#01
Whether an advocate may cease acting for a client for lack of cooperation and instructions under Order 9 Rule 13
Holding
Not determined; the application was withdrawn before a ruling on the merits
Reasoning
The advocate filed an application supported by his affidavit citing the 3rd defendant's failure to cooperate and furnish instructions. Before the court could determine the application, counsel elected to withdraw it and continue acting. The court therefore never reached the merits, and the only judicial act was marking the application withdrawn and making no order as to costs.
p. 2
Legal principles established
#Court orders
#- 1.The application dated 10th December 2019 was marked withdrawn
- 2.No order as to costs
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Section 3A of the Civil Procedure Act (CAP 21 Laws of Kenya) and Order 9 Rule 13 of the Civil Procedure Rules, 2010
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Dalco Trading Centre v Kamaita Imathiu & 3 others [2019] KEELC 405 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2019). Not stated in judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2019/405/eng@2019-12-16
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.