Leonard Cheruiyot Sonoiya v Evans A Ongicho t/a Ongicho Ongicho and Co Advocates [2020] eKLR Case Summary

Court
High Court of Kenya at Machakos
Category
Civil
Judge(s)
D.K. Kemei
Judgment Date
October 07, 2020
Country
Kenya
Document Type
PDF
Number of Pages
3
Explore the case summary of Leonard Cheruiyot Sonoiya v Evans A Ongicho t/a Ongicho Ongicho and Co Advocates [2020] eKLR. Discover key judgments and legal insights.

Case Brief: Leonard Cheruiyot Sonoiya v Evans A Ongicho t/a Ongicho Ongicho and Co Advocates [2020] eKLR

1. Case Information:
- Name of the Case: Leonard Cheruiyot Sonoiya v. Evans A. Ongicho T/A Ongicho Ongicho & Co Advocates
- Case Number: Civil Case No. 12 of 2019 (Originating Summons)
- Court: High Court of Kenya at Machakos
- Date Delivered: October 7, 2020
- Category of Law: Civil
- Judge(s): D.K. Kemei
- Country: Kenya

2. Questions Presented:
The court must resolve whether the respondent, an advocate, is obligated to honor a professional undertaking made to a third party and whether the undertaking is enforceable despite the applicant not being a party to the original agreement.

3. Facts of the Case:
The applicant, Leonard Cheruiyot Sonoiya, sought to compel the respondent, Evans A. Ongicho, to fulfill a professional undertaking dated June 26, 2016, regarding the payment of Kshs 700,000, the balance of a purchase price for Land Reference No. 12715/3174 Mavoko. The respondent had acted for the purchaser, Aloys Gekonge Tumbo-Oeri, who was to pay a total of Kshs 1,700,000 for the land, with a deposit of Kshs 900,000 already paid. The respondent had only paid Kshs 100,000 towards the undertaking and defaulted on the remaining balance. The applicant claimed an equitable interest in the property based on a memorandum of understanding with Tumbo-Oeri.

4. Procedural History:
The case commenced with an Originating Summons filed on July 4, 2018. The respondent opposed the application, arguing that the applicant was not privy to the undertaking and that the suit was time-barred. The court directed that the matter be determined through written submissions. The applicant's counsel argued for the enforcement of the undertaking, while the respondent's counsel contended that the court lacked jurisdiction and that the applicant had no standing to enforce the undertaking.

5. Analysis:
- Rules: The court considered the enforcement of professional undertakings under Order 52 Rule 7 of the Civil Procedure Rules, which allows for enforcement applications in the High Court. It was also noted that undertakings by advocates create both legal and ethical obligations.
- Case Law: The court referenced several cases, including *Equip Agencies Ltd v. Credit Bank Ltd* (2007) eKLR, which outlined the nature of professional undertakings, and *Diamond Star General Trading LLC v. Ambrose D.O. Rachier* (2017) eKLR, which emphasized the necessity for the undertaking to be made in a professional capacity. The court highlighted that the undertaking was made to an advocate and not to the applicant.
- Application: The court found that the undertaking was specifically addressed to J.K. Bosek, the advocate for the applicant, and not to the applicant directly. It concluded that the applicant, being a non-advocate, lacked the standing to enforce the undertaking. The respondent's claim that the payments had been fulfilled was not contested by the applicant, further weakening his position.

6. Conclusion:
The High Court dismissed the applicant’s summons, concluding that he could not enforce the professional undertaking as he was not a party to it. The court highlighted that the respondent had fulfilled his obligations to the actual owner of the property, rendering the applicant's claims moot.

7. Dissent:
No dissenting opinions were reported in this case.

8. Summary:
The High Court of Kenya ruled against Leonard Cheruiyot Sonoiya, finding that he lacked the standing to enforce a professional undertaking made by the respondent to another advocate. The ruling underscores the importance of direct legal relationships in the enforcement of professional undertakings and clarifies the limitations on third parties seeking to enforce such agreements. The decision emphasizes the necessity for clarity regarding the parties involved in professional undertakings and the obligations arising from them.

Document Summary

Below is the summary preview of this document.

  • Leonard-Cheruiyot-Sonoiya-v-Evans-A-Ongicho-t-a-Ongicho-Ongicho-and-Co-Advocates-[2020]-eKLR-Case-Summary_1644_0.jpg

This is the end of the summary preview.

Related Documents

View all summaries