Namiro v Ms Bbaale and Partners Advocates and Legal Consultants (Misc Cause 382 of 2023)

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.

Holding

Application dismissed under Order 19 Rule 17 of the Civil Procedure Rules for non-appearance of both parties at the hearing. Each party ordered to bear their own costs.

Outcome

Application dismissed for non-appearance

Facts

The applicant sought orders to be struck out as a party in Civil Suit No. 486 of 2025 and related applications, claiming she never gave instructions to the respondent law firm to commence proceedings in her name. She also sought an order that costs awarded against her in Civil Suit No. 486 of 2020 and Miscellaneous Application No. 328 of 2019 be met by the respondent. When the matter came up for hearing, neither the parties nor their counsel appeared. The applicant's counsel had been served on 26 May 2025. The respondent's counsel received the hearing notice in protest, stating they were engaged in the Court of Appeal but did not specify which case.

Issues

1. Whether the application should be dismissed for non-appearance of the parties.

Orders

• Application dismissed under Order 19 Rule 17 of the Civil Procedure Rules for non-appearance of the parties.
• Each party shall bear their own costs.

Legislation cited (7)

• Civil Procedure Act s.98
• Judicature Act s.33
• Advocates Act Cap.267 s.74(1)
• Advocates Act Cap.267 Rule 2(1)
• Civil Procedure Rules Order 52 Rule 1
• Civil Procedure Rules Order 52 Rule 3
• Civil Procedure Rules Order 19 Rule 17

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