HUSSEIN TAREQ ABDALLA VS DALAL JUMA HASSAN

1.    The court has considered the Notice of Motion dated 8th July 2026 brought under Order 9 Rule 9(a) and 10 of the Civil Procedure Rules, 2010, together with the supporting affidavit of Nargis Akasha Abdalla.

2.    The application is a modest one in form, but not without consequence, for after judgment an advocate does not simply drift out and another drift in; the law requires the court’s leave so that the record remains orderly and the process remains fair to all concerned.

3.    The Applicants seek leave for the firm of Kiarie Kariuki, Atieno Obura & Partners Advocates LLP to come on record for the 1st to 16th Defendants in place of the firms previously acting for the several Defendants. The grounds advanced are plain: judgment was delivered on 19th June 2026; the Defendants have chosen new counsel; and it is said that no prejudice shall be occasioned to the Plaintiff if the change is allowed.

4.    That, in the court’s view, is the heart of the matter. A litigant may choose counsel; and once judgment has been entered, that choice is regulated, not extinguished. The office of Order 9 Rule 9 is not to trap parties in the hands of advocates they no longer wish to retain, but to ensure that the transition is lawful, visible, and fair.

5.    The supporting affidavit sworn by the 16th Defendant states that she is authorized by the 1st to 15th Defendants to act on their behalf, identifies the advocates presently on record, and avers that the Defendants now wish to appoint the firm of Kiarie Kariuki, Atieno Obura & Partners Advocates LLP to act for them henceforth. Nothing placed before the court suggests fraud, confusion, ambush, or any prejudice that cannot be cured by proper service and orderly conduct of the proceedings.

6.    In those circumstances, the court is satisfied that sufficient basis has been laid for leave to be granted. Justice, after all, is not served by tethering a party to a representation he or she no longer desires, where the change is openly sought and regularized before the court.

Orders
8.    Accordingly, the court makes the following orders:
    
i.    The Notice of Motion dated 8th July 2026 is hereby allowed.

ii.    Leave is hereby granted to the firm of Kiarie Kariuki, Atieno Obura & Partners Advocates LLP to come on record for the 1st to 16th Defendants in place of the firms previously on record, namely Bryant’s Law for the 2nd, 3rd and 4th Defendants, Mwinyi Advocate for the 1st, 5th, 6th and 7th Defendants, and Balala & Abed Advocates for the 8th, 9th, 10th, 11th, 12th and 16th Defendants.

iii.    The Notice of Change of Advocates filed by the said firm shall be deemed as duly filed and served upon payment of the requisite court fees, if not already paid.

iv.    The firm now coming on record shall serve this order and the Notice of Change of Advocates upon all parties and upon the advocates previously on record forthwith and in any event within three (3) days from the date hereof.

v.    Costs of the application shall be in the cause.

9.    It is so ordered.