Mutie v Maitha (Civil Appeal (Application) 66 of 2020) [2023] KECA 1206 (KLR) (6 October 2023) (Ruling)
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Case number
- 1206
- Citation
- [2023] KECA 1206 (KLR)
- Decided
- 6 October 2023
AI Summary
Beta
Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeCivil Appeal (Application)PostureApplication by the firm of Kilonzo & Company Advocates seeking leave to cease acting for the applicantCoramMS ASIKE-MAKHANDIA
Holding
The application is allowed with no orders as to costs.
Facts
The applicant (Agnes Ngeki Mutie) sought leave to cease acting for the respondent (Jeremiah Kiilu Maitha) due to the respondent's failure to provide instructions to enable the law firm to effectively prosecute the appeal.
Issues
- Whether the applicant has properly expressed its wish to cease acting for the appellant in accordance with rule 23(2) of the Court's Rules.
- Whether the respondent has communicated the intention to cease acting to the client.
Reasoning
The applicant has properly expressed its wish to cease acting for the appellant in accordance with rule 23(2). The intention to cease acting has been communicated to the client, and the respondent did not respond to the application.
Outcome
Application allowed with no orders as to costs.
Authorities cited
Legislation (1)
- Civil Procedure Act
Cases cited (1)
- KTDA and another v Samuel Njuguna and 1153 others [2021] eKLR
Experimental AI summary generated by a language model, not a lawyer. It may contain errors or omissions and must not be relied on for legal decisions — the full judgment below is the authoritative source.
Loading judgment…