K'Opot t/a K’Opot & Company Advocates v Ominde (Miscellaneous Civil Application 37 of 2017) [2024] KEHC 5777 (KLR) (15 May 2024) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2024] KEHC 5777 (KLR) REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT KISUMU MISCELLANEOUS CIVIL APPLICATION 37 OF 2017 RE ABURILI, J MAY 15, 2024 BETWEEN STEPHEB ALUOCH K'OPOT T/A K’OPOT & COMPANY ADVOCATES ............................................................................................. APPLICANT AND SELINE GRACE OMINDE ................................................................. RESPONDENT RULING 1. It is now 10.40am. Mr. Jeji appeared at 9.15am and I asked him to supply evidence that Mr. K’Opot is an advocate in active practice but he could not supply the same. 2. I placed the file aside. I have recalled the file and he is not available to respond to the court’s query. 3. The application dated 27th June 2018 is hereby dismissed for two reasons: 1. That the same is not prosecuted by the Applicant who is absent. 2. That the person purporting to be an advocate on whose behalf the costs are sought to be recovered, a Mr. Stephen Aluoch K’Opot is not an advocate, under the Advocates Act as there is no evidence that he has a practicing license. 4. This file is closed. 5. This Ruling to be typed forthwith. DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT KISUMU THIS 15TH DAY OF MAY, 2024 R. E. ABURILI JUDGE https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2024/5777/eng@2024-05-15 1
Original judgment
Stepheb Aluoch K'opot T/A K’opot & Company Advocates v Seline Grace Ominde
A note on accuracy. These pages are generated automatically from our AI-written case briefs and have not been checked by a lawyer. Case titles and citations come from Kenya Law; the counts, topics, propositions and “treatment” labels are derived from the briefs and can be incomplete or wrong. Use them as a research aid and always read the original judgment before relying on anything here. This is not legal advice.