[2025] KEHC 4751 (KLR)

[2025] KEHC 4751 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant was retained by the respondent and that the certificate of taxation dated 10th December 2024 had neither been set aside nor altered. There was no dispute as to retainer, and the respondent did not oppose the application. Accordingly, the applicant was entitled to judgment for the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2025] KEHC 4751 (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 Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Miscellaneous E369 of 2024
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Judgment on Certificate of Taxation
Outcome
application partially allowed
Judges
TW Cherere
Legal Topics
Advocate Remuneration, Certificate of Taxation, Judgment Entry, Interest on Costs
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Advocate Remuneration Certificate of Taxation Judgment Entry Interest on Costs

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

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 Certificate of Taxation

  1. 1 Whether judgment should be entered for the applicant on the basis of an unchallenged certificate of taxation.
  2. 2 Whether interest at 14% per annum is payable on the taxed costs in the absence of proof of service of the bill of costs.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant was retained by the respondent and that the certificate of taxation dated 10th December 2024 had neither been set aside nor altered. There was no dispute as to retainer, and the respondent did not oppose the application. Accordingly, the applicant was entitled to judgment for the taxed amount. However, the court found no evidence of the manner or date of service of the bill of costs on the respondent, which is a prerequisite for interest to accrue under Paragraph 7 of the Advocates (Remuneration) Order. In the absence of such proof, interest was not awarded. The application therefore succeeded only to the extent of the principal sum and costs, but not...

Court Disposition

application partially allowed

Orders

  • Judgment is entered for the applicant against the respondent for KES 153,340.
  • The applicant is awarded the costs of the application.