Wakilii

In Re - of the Rules of Court (Legal Practitioners) 1926; In Re - of B.J.S., an Advocate of the supreme Court of Kenya (No Case Number)

East African Court of Appeal · [1938] EACA 184 · 1938 Application Granted — Struck Off Roll AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application by the Acting Attorney-General to strike an advocate off the Roll or suspend him from practice
Decision
Advocate struck off the Roll

Observed later treatment

No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.

Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains good law.

AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions—always read the source judgment before relying on it.

Holding

The Court held that 'unprofessional conduct' in Rule 7(f) of the Rules of Court (Legal Practitioners) 1926 means any misconduct committed by an advocate in his professional character or otherwise, and provides for any conduct which unfits an advocate to remain a member of the profession. The advocate, having been convicted five times of stealing funds from the Mombasa Law Society while serving as Honorary Secretary and Treasurer, was struck off the Roll of Advocates.

Outcome

Advocate struck off the Roll

Facts

B.J.S., an advocate practising in Mombasa, served as Honorary Secretary and Treasurer of the Mombasa Law Society. Between January 1937 and December 1938, he stole various sums totalling Sh. 845/25 from the Society. He was convicted five times before the Magistrate at Mombasa, pleading guilty to each charge of theft. The offences occurred on 28 January 1937 (Sh. 165), 11 March 1937 (Sh. 290/25), 22 March 1937 (Sh. 160), 9 April 1937 (Sh. 150), and 6 December 1938 (Sh. 80). He was fined for each offence. The Acting Attorney-General applied to have B.J.S. suspended from practice or struck off the Roll under Rule 7(f) of the Rules of Court (Legal Practitioners) 1926.

Issues

  1. Whether the words 'unprofessional conduct' in Rule 7(f) of the Rules of Court (Legal Practitioners) 1926 extend to misconduct outside the advocate's professional character.
  2. Whether an advocate convicted of stealing funds from the Law Society should be struck off the Roll or merely suspended from practice.

Orders

  • The name of B.J.S. be struck off the Roll of Advocates of this Court.

Rules and key headnotes

Legal Practitioners — Unprofessional Conduct — Interpretation of Rule 7(f)
The words 'unprofessional conduct' in Rule 7(f) of the Rules of Court (Legal Practitioners) 1926 mean any misconduct committed by an advocate in his professional character or otherwise and provide for any conduct which unfits an advocate to remain a member of the profession.
Legal Practitioners — Unprofessional Conduct — Not Limited to Professional Character
Rule 7(f) is not to be read ejusdem generis with sub-rules (a) to (e) because Rule 7(b) already provides for fraudulent or improper conduct in the discharge of professional duty, indicating that 'unprofessional conduct' in Rule 7(f) extends beyond conduct in a professional capacity.
Legal Practitioners — Striking Off — Criminal Conviction
A conviction for a criminal offence prima facie makes an advocate unfit to continue on the Roll, but the Court has a discretion and will inquire into the nature of the crime and will not as a matter of course strike the advocate off because he has been convicted.
Legal Practitioners — Inherent Jurisdiction of Court
The Court possesses inherent jurisdiction to strike an advocate off the Roll where the advocate's conduct renders him unfit to practise, even if such conduct falls outside the express terms of the Rules of Court, as the Court must be master in its own house.

Legislation cited (4)

  • Rules of Court (Legal Practitioners) 1926 Rule 7(f)
  • Rules of Court (Legal Practitioners) 1926 Rule 7(b)
  • Criminal Law Amendment Act 1885
  • Solicitors Act 1932

Cases cited (3)

  • In re Weare (1893) 2 QB 439
  • In re A Solicitor ex parte the Law Society (1912) 1 KB 302
  • Macauley v Judges of the Supreme Court of Sierra Leone (1928) AC 344

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.

In Re - of the Rules of Court (Legal Practitioners) 1926; In Re - of B.J.S., an Advocate of the supreme Court of Kenya (No Case Number) [1938] EACA 184 (1 January 1938)
Source: this page presents Wakilii’s issue analysis and metadata for a publicly reported Ugandan judgment. Any AI-generated summary is marked as such. Judgment text is sourced from the Uganda Legal Information Institute (ulii.org). Wakilii is not affiliated with ULII.