https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/11959

**REPUBLIC OF KENYA** **IN THE HIGH COURT AT MACHAKOS** **MISCELLANEOUS CIVIL APPLICATION NO. E184 OF 2024** **AMADI & AMADI ADVOCATES………………………………………….APPLICANT** **VERSUS** **MONARCH INSURANCE CO. LTD……………………………………..RESPONDENT** **JUDGMENT** 1. Before the Court is the Applicant's Notice of Motion dated 24th September 2025, whereby the Applicant seeks the following orders: 2. *That judgment be entered for the Applicant against the Respondent in the sum of Kshs. 94,493.60/- being the certified costs due to the Applicant as per the Certificate of Taxation issued on the 4th September, 2025 by this Honourable Court.* 3. *Interest at Court rates on (2) above from 3rd July, 2024 until payment in full.* 4. *Costs of this application be awarded to the Applicant.* 5. The application was supported by the affidavit of Eddie Amadi, an advocate of the High Court of Kenya, practising in the firm of M/S Amadi & Amadi Advocates. 6. The Applicant deponed that it was instructed by the Respondent to act for and on its behalf in and defend its interest in Kangundo CMCC Case No. E. 045 of 2022 Peter Wambua Muema vs Charles Mumo Makau*.* 7. It further deposed that upon conclusion of the said instruction, the Respondent failed to settle the Applicant’s legal fees, prompting the Applicant to file the Advocate-Client Bill of Costs in Machakos Misc**.** Application No. E184 of 2024. The Bill of Costs was taxed on 1st September 2025 in favour of the Applicant in the sum of Kshs. 94,493.60/=. 8. It was further deponed that Hon. M. Thibaru issued a Certificate of Taxation on 4th September 2025 certifying the taxed amount in the sum of Kshs. 94, 493.60/= 9. The Applicant averred that despite having issued the Respondent several reminders and entreaties, it failed and/or neglected to make good the said taxed costs. 10. It is the Applicant's case that there is no dispute as to the existence of the retainer between the parties and that the Certificate of Taxation has neither been altered nor set aside. Consequently, the Applicant urges the Court to enter Judgment in its favour for the taxed costs together with interest as prescribed by law. 11. Although the Respondent was duly served with the application as evidenced by the Affidavit of Service on record, it failed to file any response. 12. I have considered the Notice of Motion, the Supporting Affidavit, the Applicant’s written submission filed and the authorities relied upon; I am of the view that the following issues fall for determination. 13. Whether the Applicant has satisfied the requirements for entry of Judgment under Section 51 (2) of the Advocates Act; and 14. Whether the Applicant is entitled to interest on the taxed costs, and, if so, from what date 15. Section 51(2) of the Advocates Act, under which the present application is brought, governs the effect of a Certificate of Taxation and the circumstances under which the Court may enter judgment for taxed costs. The section provides as follows: *The certificate of the taxing officer by whom any bill has been taxed shall, unless it is set aside or altered by the Court, be final as to the amount of the costs covered thereby, and the Court may make such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit, including, in a case where the retainer is not disputed, an order that judgement be entered for the sum certified to be due with costs.* 1. As submitted by the Applicant, the legal position regarding Section 51 (2) of the Advocates Act is well settled. In the case of Waiganjo Wachira & Company Advocates v Pacis Insurance Company Limited [2020] KEHC 8829 (KLR), the Court reaffirmed that a Certificate of Taxation is final unless and until it is set aside or altered. 2. The Court relied on Owino Okeyo & Company Advocates v Fuelex Kenya Limited [2005] eKLRwhere it held that: *“In my understanding of the provisions of Section 51 (2) of the Advocates Act, it enables an advocate to get judgment for the taxed costs…provided that his client did not dispute the fact that the advocate had been instructed (or retained) in the first instance.”* The Court further cited Lubulellah & Associates Advocates v N K Brothers Limited [2014] eKLRwhere it observed that: *“The law is very clear that once a taxing master has taxed the costs, issued a Certificate of costs and there is no reference against his ruling or there has been a ruling and a determination made and not set aside and/or altered, no other action would be required from the court save to enter Judgment.”* 1. The material placed before the Court demonstrates that the Applicant's Advocate–Client Bill of Costs was taxed and a Certificate of Taxation was issued by the Deputy Registrar on 4th September 2025 in the sum of Kshs. 94,493.60/=. 2. There is no evidence before this Court that the said Certificate of Taxation has been altered or set aside. Consequently, pursuant to Section 51(2) of the Advocates Act, the Certificate of Taxation is final as to the amount certified. 3. In the case of Okello t/a Odero & Partners Advocates V Ali (Commercial Miscellaneous Application E1071 of 2024) [2026] KEHC 10339 (KLR) (14 July 2026) (Ruling), the court stated as follows: *“It is now well settled that while the Court must satisfy itself that the retainer is not disputed, such dispute must be real and supported by material placed before the Court. Mere silence on the part of the client cannot, in the circumstances of this case, be construed as raising a dispute regarding the Advocate-Client relationship, particularly where the Bill of costs has been taxed, and no challenge has been lodged against the Certification of Taxation. “* 1. In the present case, the Respondent, despite having been duly served with the application, neither filed a response nor otherwise challenged the existence of the retainer. 2. There is therefore no material before the Court to suggest that the Applicant's retainer is disputed. Similarly, there is no evidence that the Certificate of Taxation has been altered or set aside. 3. I am therefore satisfied that the Applicant has met the requirements for entry of Judgment under Section 51(2) of the Advocates Act. 4. On the subject of interest, the Applicant seeks interest at Court rates from 3rd July 2024 until payment in full. 5. The Respondent did not file any response to oppose this prayer 6. Rule 7 of the Advocates (Remuneration) Order provides that: “*An advocate may charge interest at 14 per cent per annum on his disbursements and costs, whether by scale or otherwise, from the expiration of one month from the delivery of his bill to the client, provided that such claim for interest is raised before the amount of the bill shall have been paid or tendered in full.”* 1. In the present case, the Applicant submitted that the Advocate-Client Bill of Costs was duly served upon the Respondent on 14th May 2025 as evidenced by the Affidavit of Service of even date. 2. The Applicant further submitted that despite service of the Bill of Costs and the lapse of thirty (30) days thereafter, the Respondent failed to settle the taxed costs. 3. It was therefore urged that the Applicant is entitled to interest at the rate of 14% *per annum* pursuant to Rule 7 of the Advocates (Remuneration) Order. 4. I have considered the Applicant's submissions on interest. Although the Applicant has prayed for interest from **3rd July 2024,** **no material has been placed on record explaining why interest should commence from that date.** 5. In the absence of such material, the Court cannot simply award interest from the date merely because it has been pleaded. 6. The Notice of Motion specifically seeks **interest at court rates.** In the circumstances, I find that the Applicant is entitled to **interest at court rates from the date the Advocate–Client Bill of Costs was served upon the Respondent**, that being **14th May 2025**, until payment in full. 7. To avoid another round of taxation on and application for entry of judgment on the costs of this application, I exercise my discretion to assess and award the costs of this application at kshs 10,000/- 8. Consequently, the Notice of Motion dated 24th September 2025 is allowed in the following terms: 9. *Judgment is hereby entered in favour of the Applicant against the Respondent in the sum of* ***Kshs. 94,493.60,*** *being the amount certified in the Certificate of Taxation issued on* ***4th September 2025.*** 10. *Interest on the taxed amount shall run at Court’s rate from 14th May 2025, being the date on which the Advocate-Client Bill of Costs was served upon the Respondent, until payment in full.* 11. *Costs of the Application assessed at kshs 10,000/- are awarded to the Applicant* **Emmanuel Bitta** **Judge of the High Court** Dated, signed and delivered via Microsoft Teams at Mombasa this 30th day of July 2026 In the presence of: Nechesah C/A Ndugire for the Applicant Kipkoech Caleb for the Respondent