Mulanya & Maondo Advocates v Noah Sapati Ole Mpamae [2020] KEELC 828 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The Court upheld a signed lawyer-client fee agreement and froze the client's Kajiado land until he pays the Kshs. 2 million owed.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Validity of the advocate-client fees agreement dated 9th July, 2018
The agreement was upheld as valid and binding under section 45(1) of the Advocates Act; the client failed to establish grounds for setting it aside.
Section 45(1) permits an advocate and client to agree in writing on the advocate's remuneration, and such agreement is binding when signed by the client. The client alleged incomplete representation and negligence, but the court found from correspondence that the advocates pursued the subdivision until the client filed a Notice to Act in person. No duress, fraud, coercion, undue influence or misrepresentation was demonstrated, so the agreement could not be vitiated.
Whether a declaration compelling payment of Kshs. 2 million legal fees should issue
Yes - the court declared the client compelled to pay in full the fees of Kshs. 2 million for representation in Milimani ELC No. 260 of 2016.
Having upheld the agreement, the court treated it as an acknowledgment of outstanding fees. The advocates had filed pleadings, witness statements and documents, and obtained seven acres for the client through a consent. The client had paid only Kshs. 30,000 for disbursements. The declaration flowed directly from the upheld agreement.
Whether a prohibition order should be registered against Kajiado/Kaputiei North/113123
Yes - the Land Registrar, Kajiado was directed to register a prohibition order over the parcel pending settlement of the Kshs. 2 million fees.
The client offered no security for costs and showed no means of paying. The court deemed the upheld fees agreement akin to a judgment, noted the client's conduct including an irregular Notice to Act in person filed without leave, and relied on the EcoBank decision where a prohibition order restrained transfer of a judgment debtor's property in pursuit of a decretal sum.
Costs of the applications
Costs awarded to the Advocates/Applicant.
The Advocates' application was allowed and both of the Client's applications were disallowed, so the successful Advocates were granted costs.
Legal principles established
#- A fees agreement under section 45(1) of the Advocates Act is valid and binding if in writing and signed by the client, and can only be set aside on vitiating factors such as fraud, collusion, undue influence, misrepresentation or coercion.
Court orders
#- 1.The Agreement dated 9th July, 2018 between the Advocates/Applicant and Client/Respondent be and is hereby upheld.
- 2.A declaration be and is hereby issued directing the Client/Respondent to pay in full the Advocate fees of Kshs 2 million for representing him in Milimani ELC No 260 of 2016.
- 3.The Land Registrar, Kajiado be and is hereby directed to register a Prohibition Order in respect to land parcel number Kajiado/Kaputiei North/113123 pending the settlement of the Legal fees amounting to Kshs. 2 million by the Client/Respondent.
- 4.The costs of the application is awarded to the Advocates/Applicant.
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Advocates Act (sections 45(1) and 45(6)) - application for prohibition order and declaration on unpaid advocate-client fees; undetermined ELC reference number as printed
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Mulanya & Maondo Advocates v Noah Sapati Ole Mpamae [2020] KEELC 828 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2020). Not stated in judgment (Advocates' Chamber Summons dated 29th May, 2019, amended 22nd July, 2020; Client's applications dated 24th November, 2019 and 3rd February, 2020). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2020/828/eng@2020-10-27
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.