The suit herein was commenced by way of a plaint dated 16 th July 2025. Contemporaneously an application by way of Notice of Motion of even date was filed. The firm of Felix Okiri & Co. Advocates are indicated to be for the plaintiff and appeared before court as such on 22 nd July 2025.
When the matter came up for mention on 23 rd July 2025, Mr. Felix Okiri appeared for the Plaintiff. Learned Counsel Mr. Musyoka holding brief for Dr. Okubasu, also contended to represent the Plaintiff courtesy of a Notice of Change of Advocate dated 23 rd July 2025.
Also present in court was Ms. Wambui Ng’ang’a counsel for the Respondent and who confirmed having filed a response to the Plaintiff’s application dated 16 th July 2025 as per the court’s directions.
This court is called to determine who between the firm of M/s. Felix Okiri & Co. Advocates and M/s. Okubasu & Munene Advocates are the duly appointed legal representative of the Plaintiff company.
Quite some material was placed before me by way of affidavit and it is clearly evident that there exists protracted Boardroom drama between Dr. Ezekiel Mutua and Mr. Richard Sereti for the control of the Plaintiff’s affairs as Chief Executive Officer. Further, the Court learnt that, this is not the only case where the two firms of advocates have faced each other in court, each purporting to be the legal representative of the Music Copyright Society of Kenya (MCSK). Learned Counsel Mr. Musyoka drew the attention of the court to some cases before the JR Division and also the ELRC where the courts had ruled in their favour.
One thing is without dispute though – it is the mandate of the CEO to appoint legal counsel for the Plaintiff company. The court heard that Dr. Mutua’s employment as CEO was terminated on 3 rd April 2025, but he has purported to continue acting as CEO.
That termination, however seems to have been injuncted by a court on 9 th June 2025 and the case (MCCC No. E3938/2025) remains pending. No evidence was availed that the temporary injunction/restraining order of 9 th June 2025 has been stayed or set aside by any court.
This court would not wish to be drawn into the dispute of who between Dr. Mutua and Mr. Sereti is the bona fide CEO of the Plaintiff company.
But until there is presented material showing that the temporary injunction order in MCCC No. E3938/2025 has been vacated, my finding is that the firm of M/s. Felix Okiri & Co. Advocates are properly on record for the Plaintiff in this matter.
I proceed to direct that, a Replying Affidavit having been filed in response to the Plaintiff’s application dated 16 th July 2025, this matter be mentioned on 5 th August 2025 for further directions. The plaintiff is at liberty to file a further affidavit within 3 days, if need be.
P.M. MULWA, J
30/07/2025
Present:
Mr. Okiri for Plaintiff/Applicant
Mr. Musyoka h/b for Dr. Okubasu
Court Assistant : Carlos
When the matter came up for mention on 23 rd July 2025, Mr. Felix Okiri appeared for the Plaintiff. Learned Counsel Mr. Musyoka holding brief for Dr. Okubasu, also contended to represent the Plaintiff courtesy of a Notice of Change of Advocate dated 23 rd July 2025.
Also present in court was Ms. Wambui Ng’ang’a counsel for the Respondent and who confirmed having filed a response to the Plaintiff’s application dated 16 th July 2025 as per the court’s directions.
This court is called to determine who between the firm of M/s. Felix Okiri & Co. Advocates and M/s. Okubasu & Munene Advocates are the duly appointed legal representative of the Plaintiff company.
Quite some material was placed before me by way of affidavit and it is clearly evident that there exists protracted Boardroom drama between Dr. Ezekiel Mutua and Mr. Richard Sereti for the control of the Plaintiff’s affairs as Chief Executive Officer. Further, the Court learnt that, this is not the only case where the two firms of advocates have faced each other in court, each purporting to be the legal representative of the Music Copyright Society of Kenya (MCSK). Learned Counsel Mr. Musyoka drew the attention of the court to some cases before the JR Division and also the ELRC where the courts had ruled in their favour.
One thing is without dispute though – it is the mandate of the CEO to appoint legal counsel for the Plaintiff company. The court heard that Dr. Mutua’s employment as CEO was terminated on 3 rd April 2025, but he has purported to continue acting as CEO.
That termination, however seems to have been injuncted by a court on 9 th June 2025 and the case (MCCC No. E3938/2025) remains pending. No evidence was availed that the temporary injunction/restraining order of 9 th June 2025 has been stayed or set aside by any court.
This court would not wish to be drawn into the dispute of who between Dr. Mutua and Mr. Sereti is the bona fide CEO of the Plaintiff company.
But until there is presented material showing that the temporary injunction order in MCCC No. E3938/2025 has been vacated, my finding is that the firm of M/s. Felix Okiri & Co. Advocates are properly on record for the Plaintiff in this matter.
I proceed to direct that, a Replying Affidavit having been filed in response to the Plaintiff’s application dated 16 th July 2025, this matter be mentioned on 5 th August 2025 for further directions. The plaintiff is at liberty to file a further affidavit within 3 days, if need be.
P.M. MULWA, J
30/07/2025
Present:
Mr. Okiri for Plaintiff/Applicant
Mr. Musyoka h/b for Dr. Okubasu
Court Assistant : Carlos