[2025] KEHC 6574 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant's chamber summons dated 9/5/2025 was filed outside the statutory period prescribed by Rule 11 of the Advocates Remuneration Order for filing references against taxation decisions. The court further noted procedural impropriety in the use of an incorrect case number, which did not...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2025] KEHC 6574 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Martin Ajujo; Respondent: Kiama Wangai & Company Advocates
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Judicial Review Miscellaneous Application E046 of 2025
- Procedural Posture
- Judicial Review Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Taxation Order
- Outcome
- application struck out as incompetent and filed out of time; file closed; no order as to costs
- Judges
- RE Aburili
- Legal Topics
- Advocate Client Costs, Taxation of Costs, Judicial Review Timelines
- 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
Martin Ajujo
Applicant
Kiama Wangai & Company Advocates
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Taxation Order
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the application to set aside the taxation order was filed within the statutory period under Rule 11 of the Advocates Remuneration Order.
- 2 Whether the applicant's use of an incorrect case number and filing procedure rendered the application incompetent.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant's chamber summons dated 9/5/2025 was filed outside the statutory period prescribed by Rule 11 of the Advocates Remuneration Order for filing references against taxation decisions. The court further noted procedural impropriety in the use of an incorrect case number, which did not correspond to the present parties or subject matter. The court characterized the applicant's actions as an attempt to regularize a non-existent application and held that such conduct was both mischievous and incompetent. Consequently, the application was struck out for being filed out of time and for procedural defects, with the court declining to make any order as to costs and...
Court Disposition
application struck out as incompetent and filed out of time; file closed; no order as to costs
Orders
- The application dated 9/5/2025 is struck out for being incompetently filed outside the statutory period.
- No orders as to costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
25 paragraphs
Ajujo v Kiama Wangai & Company Advocates (Judicial Review Miscellaneous Application E046 of 2025) [2025] KEHC 6574 (KLR) (Judicial Review) (20 May 2025) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2025] KEHC 6574 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Judicial Review
Judicial Review Miscellaneous Application E046 of 2025
RE Aburili, J
May 20, 2025
Between
Martin Ajujo
Applicant
and
Kiama Wangai & Company Advocates
Respondent
Ruling
1. The application dated 9/5/2025 is not certified urgent. The Ruling by the Deputy Registrar on taxation striking out the Client /Advocate Bill of Costs was rendered on 3/4/2025.
2. The applicant herein has filed an application dated 9/5/2025 by way of chamber summons, under Rule 11(2) of the Advocates Remuneration Order, seeking to set aside the order of 3/4/2025 taxing the Advocate/Client Bill of Costs at Kshs 223,781. 40 cts.
3. In an earlier application filed during the recess dated 16/4/2024 the court observed that the application was bare. There was only a prayer for a the applicant to be heard during the recess, without any prayer to do with the impugned taxation and for setting aside of the order on taxation of the bill of Costs.
4. No doubt, the application dated 9/5/2025 is filed out of the period stipulated in Rule 11 of the Advocates Remuneration Order for filing of references.
5. I find the applicant’s attempt to sneak in the application to sanitize a-no- application at all, to be mischievous. This is so, considering that the applicant has even used a different JR MISC case number E133 of 2025 and on checking the CTS, we do not have such a case number under Miscellaneous application. What we have, is Judicial Review Application No. E133 of 2025 belonging to totally different parties and the subject matter is different from the present application.
6. The application dated 9/5/2025 is struck out for being incompetently filed outside the statutory period.
7. I make no orders as to costs.
8. No other application shall be entertained in this file. I so order.
9. This file is closed.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT NAIROBI THIS 20TH DAY OF MAY, 2025R.E. ABURILIJUDGE