Case ID:175789
Parties: None
Date Delivered: None
Case Type: None
Court: None
Judges: None
Citation: None
Manchester Outfitters Suiting Division Limited (Now Called) King Woollen Mills Limited & another v Standard Chartered Financial Services Limited & another [2021] eKLR
Case Metadata
Case Number:
Civil Appeal (Application) 88 of 2000
Parties:
Manchester Outfitters Suiting Division Limited (Now Called) King Woollen Mills Limited & another v Standard Chartered Financial Services Limited & A.D. Gregory And C.D. Cahill
Date Delivered:
21 May 2021
Case Class:
Civil
Court:
Court of Appeal at Nairobi
Case Action:
Ruling
Judge(s):
Fatuma sichale
Citation:
Manchester Outfitters Suiting Division Limited (Now Called) King Woollen Mills Limited & another v Standard Chartered Financial Services Limited & another [2021] eKLR
Case History:
Being an appeal from the judgment of the High Court of Kenya at Nairobi (E.M. Githinji,J) dated 30th July, 1999 in HCCC NO. 5002 OF 1990
Court Division:
Civil
County:
Nairobi
History Docket No:
HCCC NO. 5002 OF 1990
History Judges:
Erastus Mwaniki Githinji
History County:
Nairobi
Disclaimer:
The information contained in the above segment is not part of the judicial opinion delivered by the Court. The metadata has been prepared by Kenya Law as a guide in understanding the subject of the judicial opinion. Kenya Law makes no warranties as to the comprehensiveness or accuracy of the information
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL
AT NAIROBI
CORAM: SICHALE, JA (IN CHAMBERS)
CIVIL APPEAL (APPLICATION) NO. 88 OF 2000
BETWEEN
MANCHESTER OUTFITTERS SUITING DIVISION
LIMITED
(NOW CALLED)
KING WOOLLEN MILLS LIMITED....
1
ST
APPELLANT
GALOT INDUSTRIES LIMITED.........................................
2
ND
APPELLANT
AND
STANDARD CHARTERED FINANCIAL
SERVICES LIMITED
..........................................................
1
ST
RESPONDENT
A.D. GREGORY AND C.D. CAHILL................................
2
ND
RESPONDENT
(Being an appeal from the judgment of the High Court of Kenya at Nairobi (E.M. Githinji,J) dated 30
th
July, 1999
in HCCC NO. 5002 OF 1990)
**************
RULING
The motion dated
8
th
February, 2021
came up for hearing before me on
22
nd
March, 2021
. In the motion, the applicant, the firm of
Amolo & Gacoka
Advocates applied for an order to cease acting for
A.D Gregory
, the 2
nd
respondent herein.
The motion is supported by the affidavit of
James Gacoka Advocates
sworn on
8
th
February, 2021
and on the grounds on the face of the motion. Briefly, the applicant’s position is that it was initially acting for the 1
st
and 2
nd
respondent; that in
November, 2020
, the 1
st
respondent appointed the firm of
Oraro & Co. Advocates
to act on its behalf; that the 2nd respondent was the managing partner of KPMG, an audit firm and who was the joint receiver appointed by the 1
st
respondent; that since the retirement of the 2
nd
respondent from practice, the said firm (KPMG) has had no contact with the applicant.
There was no replying affidavit filed by the 2
nd
respondent who was served with a hearing notice by advertisement in the Standard Newspaper of
12
th
March, 2021
.
In view of the above, I think it is only fair that the firm of
Amolo &
Gacoka Advocates
should be granted leave to cease acting for the 2
nd
respondent.
Accordingly, the motion dated
8
th
February, 2021
is hereby allowed. I make no order as to costs.
Dated and Delivered at Nairobi this 21
st
Day of May, 2021.
F. SICHALE
......................................................
JUDGE OF APPEAL
I certify that this is a true copy of the original.
Signed
DEPUTY REGISTRAR