• Law Society of Kenya
  • The Chartered Institute of Arbitrators (Kenya Chapter)
  • International Bar Association


  • Advocate of the High court of Kenya – 2003
  • Commissioner for Oaths -2007
  • Patent Agent, Kenya Industrial Property Institute 2012


  • Kenya School of Law – Bar Qualifying Examinations
  • University of Nairobi, LLB (Second Class Upper Division)


  • English
  • Kiswahili

James Muthui is an Advocate of the High Court of Kenya, admitted in 2003. His main area of practice is civil litigation in the following areas: land disputes, intellectual property disputes, banking law, environmental & conservation law, judicial review, employment disputes, debt collection, arbitration and mediation and other general commercial areas. James handles matters in the Supreme Court, Court of Appeal, the High Court, The Industrial Court and Tribunals.

  • Recently successfully defended Unilever Tea Kenya Limited (UTKL) a subsidiary of Unilever, an Anglo-Dutch conglomerate, involved in the production of tea mainly for export in an industrial cause filed by Kenya Plantation and Agricultural Workers Union against UTKL for pa precedent setting litigation for payment of extra pay in respect of rest days for over 10,000 piece rated employees and compensation for alleged violation of the Kenyan employment laws, the parties Collective Bargaining Agreement and International labour practices. UTKL is the single largest private sector employer in Kenya, employing about 20,000 people.
  • Has curved a niche in advising local and international entities in navigating through the devolved system of Governance and its legal implications on a wide range of matters including taxation and conflict of laws. The devolved system of government and enforcement of the Constitution of Kenya 2010 has become a pertinent  area of law
  • Republic v Cholmondeley – Defended a murder charge against a white Kenyan aristocrat landowner of British ancestry attracting local and international attention.  Apart from its high profile nature, the trial was mired in numerous interlocutory points of substance involving complex and substantative procedural aspects of the law (constitutional rights, admissibility of evidence and disclosure obligations by accused persons the conduct of the trial). The vilification of the accused by the local and international media on grounds irrelevant to the case and evidence, such as race, colonial heritage, wealth, class, local politics, land tenure and ethnicity made the conduct of the case complex and taxing for the advocates who at times even faced personal threats and risks.


  • Top Tier Firm 2018
  • IP Stars Tier 1 17 logo 2
  • Top_tier_firms
  • Top_tier_firms
  • Chambers-KS
  • Top-Tier-Firm-2017-Rosette-Web
  • IFLR1000-Top-Tier-Firm-2016
  • IFLR-Energy-Infrastructure-2015-Top-Tier-Firm-Rosette
  • Expert-Guides
  • CorpIntl-Legal-Awards
  • Managing-IP-Rosette
  • WTR-2014