Mwazonga & another v Chief Land Registrar & 6 others; Sifuna Kinisu & Company Advocates (Respondent) (Environment and Land Judicial Review Case E004 of 2021) [2025] KEELC 103 (KLR)

The court first addressed jurisdiction, citing the Owners of Motor Vessel 'Lilian S' principle via the Supreme Court. Although fee disputes are not inherently land disputes, the fee arrangement arose directly from the settlement of a land claim (adverse possession suit) in the ELC. Being consequential to those proceedings, the dispute properly belongs before this Court, and no basis for the jurisdictional objection was found.

Order 30 of the Civil Procedure Rules governs suits by or against firms and persons carrying on business in names other than their own. Rule 9 provides that such a person may be sued in the name or style as if it were a firm. The court interpreted the rule as targeting the proprietor through the business name, and found the Respondent law firm rightly sued.

The Respondent argued the Summons was incompetent for challenging a remuneration agreement outside the s.45(2) mechanism. The court held the provision envisages a client seeking to set aside or vary an agreement, whereas the Applicants sought enforcement of the agreements, which the Respondent did not deny. The provision was therefore inapplicable.

The Respondent did not oppose the assertions on quantum disbursed or fees, and the agreements (drafted by the Respondent as a law firm) evidenced the parties' entitlements. Having been paid its fees by way of 4 acres of land, the Respondent was entitled only to the Kshs 1,000,000/- awarded as costs in the Judicial Review; that sum was deducted from the claimed Kshs 18,481,010/- to arrive at the final balance.