[2025] KEHC 2786 (KLR)
The court declined to enter judgment in terms of the certificate of taxation because there was a substantive dispute on retainer, specifically whether the applicant, as a salaried employee of the respondent at the material time, was entitled to charge fees. The court held that the Deputy Registrar lacked...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2025] KEHC 2786 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: A. Thuo Kanai Advocates; Respondent: Cannon Assurance Limited
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Application 125 of 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Entry of Judgment Following Taxation
- Outcome
- Application for entry of judgment declined; no orders as to costs.
- Judges
- BM Musyoki
- Legal Topics
- Advocate Remuneration, Taxation of Costs, Retainer Dispute
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
A. Thuo Kanai Advocates
Applicant
Cannon Assurance Limited
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Entry of Judgment Following Taxation
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Deputy Registrar had jurisdiction to determine the question of retainer when raised by the respondent.
- 2 Whether judgment can be entered in terms of the certificate of taxation where there is a dispute on retainer.
Ratio Decidendi
The court declined to enter judgment in terms of the certificate of taxation because there was a substantive dispute on retainer, specifically whether the applicant, as a salaried employee of the respondent at the material time, was entitled to charge fees. The court held that the Deputy Registrar lacked jurisdiction to determine the retainer issue, and that such a dispute must be resolved by a judge before judgment can be entered under Section 51(2) of the Advocates Act. The court adopted its reasoning from related applications (Nos. 126 and 329 of 2013), emphasizing that entry of judgment is not a mere formality where the retainer is contested. The applicant must first seek a judicial...
Court Disposition
Application for entry of judgment declined; no orders as to costs.
Orders
- Entry of judgment as prayed is declined.
- The applicant shall pursue determination of the retainer question before a judge before the application for entry of judgment is considered.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
19 paragraphs
A. Thuo Kanai Advocates v Cannon Assurance Limited (Miscellaneous Application 125 of 2013) [2025] KEHC 2786 (KLR) (Commercial and Tax) (14 March 2025) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2025] KEHC 2786 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
Commercial and Tax
Miscellaneous Application 125 of 2013
BM Musyoki, J
March 14, 2025
Between
A. Thuo Kanai Advocates
Applicant
and
Cannon Assurance Limited
Respondent
Ruling
1. The application dated 20-07-2021 to which this ruling relates is similar to applications in miscellaneous applications numbers 329 of 2013 and 126 of 2013. It seeks entry of judgement against the respondent in terms of certificate of taxation dated 8-07-2021. I have made analysis and gave reasons for my rulings in the aforesaid two applications which I hold will apply in this ruling.
2. In the early stages of this cause, there arose dispute on retainer where the respondent took position that the applicant was not entitled to charge fees as he was at the time he represented it in the primary suit, its salaried employee. In her ruling dated 25-06-2013, Honourable D.W. Nyambu, Deputy Registrar held that the applicant was entitled to charge fees. For all intends and purposes this was a clear dispute on retainer and as I have held in the two rulings, the Deputy Registrar did not have jurisdiction to determine the question of retainer as and when it is raised.
3. For the same reasons I have recorded in the rulings in miscellaneous applications numbers 126 of 2013 and 329 of 2013 delivered alongside this one, I decline to enter judgment as prayed because doing so will offend Section 51(2) of the Advocates Act. The applicant shall pursue determination of that question before a judge before the application for entry of judgment is considered. I make no orders as to costs.
DATED SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT NAIROBI THIS 14TH DAY OF MARCH 2025. B.M. MUSYOKIJUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT.Ruling delivered in presence of Mr. Thuo for the applicant and Mr. Gitonga for the respondent