[2025] KEHC 3506 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant had served the bill of costs and followed due process. There was no evidence of a dispute as to retainer or the amount taxed, and the respondent did not participate or object. Although the application cited the wrong statutory provision, the court applied Section 51(2) of the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2025] KEHC 3506 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Sophie Chirchir T/A Cherono Chirchir & Co Advocates; Respondent: Africa Merchant Assurance Co Ltd
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nyeri
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Miscellaneous Application 80 of 2019
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Judgment on Taxed Costs
- Outcome
- application allowed; judgment entered for applicant
- Judges
- DKN Magare
- Legal Topics
- Taxation of Costs, Advocate Remuneration, Certificate of Taxation, Judgment Entry on Taxed Costs
- 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
Sophie Chirchir T/A Cherono Chirchir & Co Advocates
Applicant
Africa Merchant Assurance Co Ltd
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Judgment on Taxed Costs
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether judgment should be entered for the applicant based on a taxed and certified bill of costs.
- 2 Whether the absence of an annexed Certificate of Taxation precludes entry of judgment.
- 3 Whether the application was properly brought under the correct statutory provision.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant had served the bill of costs and followed due process. There was no evidence of a dispute as to retainer or the amount taxed, and the respondent did not participate or object. Although the application cited the wrong statutory provision, the court applied Section 51(2) of the Advocates Act, which empowers the court to enter judgment on a certificate of taxation that has not been set aside or altered, provided there is no dispute as to retainer. The absence of an annexed Certificate of Taxation was noted, but the court was satisfied that the sum was taxed and certified. Accordingly, judgment was entered for the applicant for the taxed amount, with...
Court Disposition
application allowed; judgment entered for applicant
Orders
- Judgment is entered for the applicant against the respondent for Kshs. 183,370.
- Interest is awarded effective from 13.8.2021.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
20 paragraphs
Chirchir t/a Cherono Chirchir & Co Advocates v Africa Merchant Assurance Co Ltd (Civil Miscellaneous Application 80 of 2019) [2025] KEHC 3506 (KLR) (19 March 2025) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2025] KEHC 3506 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Nyeri
Civil Miscellaneous Application 80 of 2019
DKN Magare, J
March 19, 2025
Between
Sophie Chirchir T/A Cherono Chirchir & Co Advocates
Applicant
and
Africa Merchant Assurance Co Ltd
Respondent
Ruling
1. This is a ruling over a Miscellaneous Application dated 28th September, 2021. The Applicant sought relief that judgment be entered for the Applicant against the Respondent in the sum of Kshs. 183,370/= being the sum taxed and certified by the Deputy Registrar on 13th July, 2021 as due to the Applicant. The Court however notes that the Applicant did not annex the Certificate of Taxation.
2. The application is stated to be brought under Section 55(2) of the Advocates Act but ought to have been brought under Section 51 (2) of the Advocates Act. The said Section 51(2) of the Advocates Act provides thus:a.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 judgment be entered for the sum certified to be due with costs.
3. As a fact, after filing of the Notice of Motion dated 28th September 2021, there does not appear to be active participation of the Respondent. In the case of Musyoka & Wambua Advocates v RustamHira Advocate (2006) eKLR it was held: -Section 51 of the Act makes general provisions as to taxation, as the marginal note indicates. One of those provisions is that the court has discretion to enter judgment on a Certificate of Taxation which has not been set aside or altered, where there is no dispute as to retainer. This in my view is a mode of recovery of taxed costs provided by law, in addition to filing of suit...
4. The Applicant has done her part, serving the bill of costs, and other processes. The application is allowed.
Determination 5. I therefore make the following orders: -a.Judgment be and is hereby entered for the Applicant against the Respondent for Kshs. 183,370/=.b.Interest thereon is awarded effective as from 13. 8.2021. c.The file is closed.
DELIVERED, DATED AND SIGNED AT NYERI ON THIS 19TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025. RULING DELIVERED THROUGH MICROSOFT TEAMS ONLINE PLATFORM.KIZITO MAGAREJUDGEIn the presence of: -Ms. Mbaabu for the ApplicantNo appearance for the RespondentCourt Assistant – Michael