Kweyu v Chore & another (Environment and Land Case 4 of 2019) [2025] KEELC 5110 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kakamega court refused to let a new law firm take over a case after judgment because the lawyer behind it was not properly registered to practise.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether leave should be granted under Order 9 rule 9 for a change of advocate for the 1st defendant after judgment
Leave was refused because the incoming representation was tainted: the person said to hold instructions, Kasamani Vincent Lutta, is not an advocate on the LSK records and a struck-off advocate had not completed the conditions for restoration to the Roll.
The court accepted that legal representation is a constitutional right and that Order 9 rule 9 requires leave for a post-judgment change of advocate. However, it found from LSK records and the Advocates Disciplinary Tribunal decision that Charles Lutta Kasamani remained struck off, conditions for restoration (tutelage and CPD points) unfulfilled, and that no advocate named Kasamani Vincent Lutta exists. The practising certificate presented was therefore not authentic, and allowing the firm on record would ratify unlawful practice by an unqualified person.
Legal principles established
#- A change of advocate after judgment can only take effect with leave of court under Order 9 rule 9 of the Civil Procedure Rules
- Courts take judicial notice, by virtue of section 60(1)(k) of the Evidence Act, of the names of advocates and persons authorised to appear before them as recorded by the Law Society of Kenya
- An advocate struck off the Roll who has not been restored may not practise or represent parties; a purported practising certificate for a non-advocate is not authentic and cannot be relied upon
Court orders
#- 1.The notice of motion dated 7th October 2024 is dismissed
- 2.Costs of the application to the plaintiff
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Order 9 rule 9 of the Civil Procedure Rules and Article 152(d) of the Constitution (as invoked in the application)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Kweyu v Chore & another (Environment and Land Case 4 of 2019) [2025] KEELC 5110 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/5110/eng@2025-06-30
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.