Law society sues firm over Mau Mau case

The legal fee charged by British firm Leigh Day is now a matter before court after the Law Society of Kenya  (LSK) challenged the handling of the Sh2.5 billion compensation for the Mau Mau veterans.

When the British Government agreed to compensate the veterans in an out-of-court settlement, the legal fee stood at Sh769,680,000 out of the Sh2.5 billion paid out by the British authorities. LSK argues that the amount is more than 40 per cent of the total benefits, which they claim is illegal.

The LSK is also challenging the conduct of Leigh Day in regard to practice of law in Kenya when it took over the Mau Mau case. Also questioned is the authenticity of the list relied on by the firm to share out the money.

Leigh Day handled the case filed at a London court by the Mau Mau War Veterans Association that led to an out-of-court settlement and the release of Sh2.5 billion to compensate some of the victims of colonial torture.

Last month, the LSK filed a memorandum of appearance to have the Kenya Human Rights Commission (KHRC) and chairman of the Mau Mau Association, Gitu wa Kahengeri, included in the suit. Martyn Day, the law firm’s senior partner, is also a respondent.

“The plaintiffs aver that the defendants have acted unlawfully, unprocedurally, fraudulently and unprofessionally in dealing with this matter,” reads an affidavit signed by the LSK Chief Executive Officer.

Some 5,228 Mau Mau veterans were enlisted for a Sh340,000 pay-out but over 10,000 claimants not included in the Kahengeri group were excluded. The LSK argues that victims of similar human rights atrocities in Kenya have been awarded Sh10 million by Kenyan courts and in Britain up to Sh30 million.

“The defendants have failed to disclose to the public and the victims the names of the persons who have been paid,” the LSK argues.

Further, the Kenyan lawyers are also complaining over claims that not all the 5,228 persons have been paid their dues. When contacted by the Sunday Nation, Mr Daniel Leader, one of the partners at Leigh Day, dismissed the LSK suit although he argued that his company is yet to be officially served.

“We have been told about the suit by the KHRC. However, we have not been served with the papers and are not aware of the detailed nature of the allegations. In the absence of having been served by the LSK, we are unable to serve a defence,” Mr Leader said.

Mr Leader also dismissed as “non-entity” questions about the status of their legal practice and certification in Kenya. “The LSK’s position seems to be that if you have a client in Kenya and are seeking instructions from them in relation to a case brought in London you need to be authorised to do so by the Law Society of Kenya, which is not the case,” the British lawyer argued.

He further added: “If a case is brought in Kenya by British citizens, Kenyan lawyers are free to take instructions in the UK and are governed by the rules of the LSK. Likewise, we are governed by the rules of the English Law Society with regard to English litigation.”

He further explained that they have made payments to the majority of the 5,228 recipients through individual bank accounts.