Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCOtherEnvironment and Land Case 85 of 2018· [2025] KEELC 436 (KLR)

Kimani v Kimani (Environment and Land Case 85 of 2018) (30 January 2025) (Directions) [2025] KEELC 436 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
30 January 2025
AOAntony O. Ombwayo
237 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~1 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

After judgment in Kenya, you cannot change lawyers without notifying the current lawyer on record — unserved applications will not be heard.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
In these directions in Environment and Land Case 85 of 2018 at Nakuru, Ombwayo J dealt with an application dated 8th October 2024 filed by Andrew Kimani, the applicant, against Wanjiku Erikana Kimani, the respondent. On perusing the application and the filed documents, the court found that the application had not been served upon Kirera and Company Advocates, the advocate on record for the decree holder. The court set out the purpose of Order 9 rule 9 of the Civil Procedure Rules 2010: to ensure there would be no change of advocate after judgment unless the advocate on record consents or leave of the court is obtained, and held that leave cannot be obtained unless the advocate on record is heard. Because the applicant had not served the advocate on record, the court held the application could not be entertained. Rather than dismissing it outright, the court gave directions: the firm of Kirera and Company Advocates was to be served with the application within five days of the directions, failing which the application would stand dismissed with costs. Upon service, the matter was set for hearing on 27th February 2025. This is a procedural ruling on service and the requirements of Order 9 rule 9, not a final determination of the underlying suit.

Key legal issues

#
01

Service on the advocate on record before an application under Order 9 rule 9 can be entertained

Holding

An application seeking to come on record or change advocates after judgment must be served on the advocate on record; failing service, it cannot be entertained and may be dismissed with costs

Reasoning

The court construed Order 9 rule 9 of the Civil Procedure Rules 2010, holding that its purpose is to protect the advocate on record after judgment. Leave of the court cannot be obtained unless the advocate on record is heard. Since the applicant failed to serve Kirera and Company Advocates, the application could not be entertained; the court directed service within 5 days, failing which the application stands dismissed with costs.

p. 1

Legal principles established

#
  • The purpose of Order 9 rule 9 of the Civil Procedure Rules 2010 is to prevent change of advocate after judgment unless the advocate on record consents or the court grants leave, and leave cannot be obtained unless the advocate on record is heard

Court orders

#
  1. 1.That the firm of Kirera and Company Advocates be served with the application within the next 5 days of the directions
  2. 2.That failure to serve within 5 days, the application is dismissed with costs
  3. 3.That upon service, hearing on 27th February 2025
Jurisdiction invoked
Environment and Land Court Act, in respect of Environment and Land Case 85 of 2018

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Kimani v Kimani (Environment and Land Case 85 of 2018)  (30 January 2025) (Directions) [2025] KEELC 436 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Environment and Land Case 85 of 2018. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/436/eng@2025-01-30

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.