[2019] KEELC 1509 (KLR)

[2019] KEELC 1509 (KLR)

The court held that the value of the subject matter for purposes of taxation is the value at the time of filing suit, as stated in the pleadings, not the historical purchase price. The applicant had pleaded the value of the land as over Kshs.20,000,000/= in his plaint and sought alternative relief based on this...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2019] KEELC 1509 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Francis K. Chepkurui; Respondent: Patrick Nolan Neylan; Respondent: Kevin Ian Nolan Neylan; Respondent: Joseph Kamira Wanjau
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Nakuru
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 143 of 2019
Procedural Posture
Reference / Ruling on Reference From Taxation of Costs
Outcome
Reference allowed in part; instruction fees reduced to Kshs.520,000/= for each set of defendants.
Legal Topics
Taxation of Costs, Instruction Fees, Valuation of Subject Matter, Pleadings and Pleading Value
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Land and Property Taxation of Costs Instruction Fees Valuation of Subject Matter Pleadings and Pleading Value

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Francis K. Chepkurui

Applicant

Patrick Nolan Neylan

Respondent

Kevin Ian Nolan Neylan

Respondent

Joseph Kamira Wanjau

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Reference / Ruling on Reference From Taxation of Costs

  1. 1 Whether the taxing officer erred in assessing instruction fees based on the value of the subject matter at the time of filing suit rather than the historical purchase price.
  2. 2 Whether the value stated in the pleadings or the original purchase price should determine the instruction fees for taxation purposes.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the value of the subject matter for purposes of taxation is the value at the time of filing suit, as stated in the pleadings, not the historical purchase price. The applicant had pleaded the value of the land as over Kshs.20,000,000/= in his plaint and sought alternative relief based on this value. The 3rd defendant admitted this value in his defence. The court found that the taxing officer erred by not strictly applying the value stated in the pleadings and by awarding a higher instruction fee than warranted. The correct instruction fee should have been calculated using Kshs.20,000,000/= as the value, resulting in Kshs.520,000/=, not Kshs.600,000/=. The court...

Court Disposition

Reference allowed in part; instruction fees reduced to Kshs.520,000/= for each set of defendants.

Orders

  • Instruction fees for the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd defendants are taxed at Kshs.520,000/= each.
  • Other costs such as getting up fees to be adjusted accordingly.