https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2026/2148
The application was unopposed, the certificate of costs had not been set aside, stayed, or appealed, and section 51(2) of the Advocates Act entitled the applicant to judgment for the taxed sum. However, interest was only payable in accordance with Rule 7 of the Advocates (Remuneration) Order, so the court allowed...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2026] KEELRC 2148 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: FREDRICK KAIRU MAINA T/A KAIRU MAINA & ASSOCIATES ADVOCATES; Respondent: GRISH PATEL T/A TEDJIP HARDWARE AND STORES
- Court
- Employment and Labour Relations Court
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Employment and Labour Relations Miscellaneous E011 of 2024
- Procedural Posture
- Advocate Client Miscellaneous Application for Adoption of Taxed Costs as Judgment and Execution / Ruling on Unopposed Application After Taxation
- Outcome
- Application allowed with variation on interest
- Judges
- ["AN Mwaure"]
- Legal Topics
- Adoption of Certificate of Costs as Judgment, Taxation of Advocate Client Bill, Interest on Taxed Costs, Execution of Certificate of Costs, Section 51(2) Advocates Act
- 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
FREDRICK KAIRU MAINA T/A KAIRU MAINA & ASSOCIATES ADVOCATES
Applicant
GRISH PATEL T/A TEDJIP HARDWARE AND STORES
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Advocate Client Miscellaneous Application for Adoption of Taxed Costs as Judgment and Execution / Ruling on Unopposed Application After Taxation
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the certificate of costs issued by the taxing officer should be adopted as judgment of the court
- 2 Whether the applicant is entitled to interest on the taxed costs and from what date
Ratio Decidendi
The application was unopposed, the certificate of costs had not been set aside, stayed, or appealed, and section 51(2) of the Advocates Act entitled the applicant to judgment for the taxed sum. However, interest was only payable in accordance with Rule 7 of the Advocates (Remuneration) Order, so the court allowed interest at 14% per annum from 4 June 2024 until payment in full.
Court Disposition
Application allowed with variation on interest
Orders
- Judgment entered in favour of the applicant against the respondent for Kshs.181,650/= under section 51(2) of the Advocates Act.
- The sum of Kshs.181,650/= shall attract interest at 14% per annum from 4 June 2024 until payment in full.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE EMPLOYMENT & LABOUR RELATIONS COURT AT NAKURU ELRC MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO. E011 OF 2024 (Before Hon. Lady Justice Anna Ngibuini Mwaure) FREDRICK KAIRU MAINA T/A KAIRU MAINA & ASSOCIATES ADVOCATES ...………….………………..……….….. APPLICANT VERSUS GRISH PATEL T/A TEDJIP HARDWARE AND STORES ……………………………………….RESPONDENT RULING Introduction 1. The Applicant filed Chambers Summons dated 24th May 2026 under Certificate of Urgency seeking the following orders that: a. This Honourable Court be pleased to adopt the sum of Kenya Shillings One Hundred and Eighty-One Thousand Six Hundred and Fifty (Kshs.181,650/=) taxed by Hon. M. Kyaloi the Deputy Registrar on 24th July 2024 as a judgment of this Honourable Court. b. The Honourable Court be pleased to order that the sum of Kenya Shillings One Hundred and Eighty One Thousand Six MSC APPLIC. NO E011 OF 2024 RULING PAGE 1 OF 9 Hundred and Fifty(Kshs.181,650/=) do accrue interest at the court rates from the date of taxation by Hon. M. Kyalo, the Deputy Registrar, on the 24th of July, 2024, until payment is made in full. c. The Honourable Court do give the Applicant leave to enforce the Certificate of costs as a decree of this Honourable Court d. The costs of this application be payable by the Respondent. 2. The application is brought under Order 22 Rule 22 and Order 49 Rule 5 of the Civil Procedure Rules and section 51(2) of the Advocates Act, and all other enabling provisions of law. Applicant’s case 3. The application is supported by the affidavit sworn by Fredrick Kairu Maina, the managing partner of the Applicant firm, avers that his firm rendered legal services for the Respondent in Nakuru ELRC No. E109 of 2018 Solomon Asava v Grish Kumar Patel t/a Tejdip Hardware Stores. 4. After the case concluded, the Applicant avers that the Respondent allegedly refused to pay for the MSC APPLIC. NO E011 OF 2024 RULING PAGE 2 OF 9 services, prompting the Applicant to file a bill of costs in ELRC Miscellaneous Cause No. E011 of 2024. 5. The Applicant avers that a Certificate of Costs was subsequently issued by the Deputy Registrar on 24th July 2024, and now seeks its adoption by this Honourable court before execution can proceed. 6. The Applicant served the Respondent with the application, but the Respondent failed to file any response thereto. Analysis and determination 7. The court has considered the application, supporting affidavit by the Applicant and the annexure thereto. The court has only one issue for determination, which is whether the certificate of costs issued by the taxing officer should be adopted as the judgement of this Honourable Court. 8. Section 51 of the Advocates Act provides as follows: “Every application for an order for the taxation of an advocate’s bill or for the delivery of such a bill and the delivering up of any deeds, documents and papers by an advocate shall be made in the matter of that advocate. MSC APPLIC. NO E011 OF 2024 RULING PAGE 3 OF 9 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.” 9. In Muthaura Mugambi Ayugi & Njonjo Advocates v Quest Laboratories Limited [2017] KEELRC 399 (KLR) where the court cited the case of Daly & Figgis Advocates versus Homelex Limited (2013) eKLR which held as follows: “… Section 51 (2) of the Advocates Act … the words of the said section were very clear that where a Certificate of Taxation had neither been set aside nor altered by the Court, and where there was no order of stay, the Certificate was final as to the amount of costs covered thereby and to allege a dispute at summary Judgement stage would amount to a contradiction of express and mandatory statutory provisions.” 10. Rule 7 of the Advocates(Remuneration) Order provide as follows: MSC APPLIC. NO E011 OF 2024 RULING PAGE 4 OF 9 “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.” 11.In this instant case, on 4th June 2024, a Certificate of Costs was issued by the taxing officer, Hon. M. Kyalo, in favour of the Applicant Advocate upon successful taxation of the Advocate–Client Bill of Costs dated 14th February, 2024, which was taxed at Kshs.181,650/=. The Respondent has neither filed any application to set aside, stay, or appeal against the Taxing Officer’s decision and the said Certificate of Costs, nor opposed the Applicant’s application. Consequently, the application stands uncontroverted. 12.Accordingly, the court enters judgment in favour of the Applicant against the Respondent in the sum of Kshs. 181,650/= as per the prayer in the application. MSC APPLIC. NO E011 OF 2024 RULING PAGE 5 OF 9 13.For interest, the court will rely on the case of Tom Ojienda & Associates v Nairobi City County [2022] KEHC 86 (KLR) where the court stated as follows: “On the issue of interests on the taxed costs; even though the application is uncontested the Applicant has not tendered any evidence that it raised the issue of interest with its client when tendering the Bill of Costs and is therefore found to have failed to have satisfied the conditions as set out in Rule 7 of the Advocates (Remuneration) Order which stipulates that: “An advocate may charge interest at 14% per annum on his disbursements and costs, whether by scale or otherwise, from the expiry to one month from the delivery of his bill to the client, providing such claim for interest is raised before the amount has been paid or tendered in full.” In any event the Rule clearly stipulates that such claim for interest is limited to costs and disbursements; it does not provide for interest on the full taxed MSC APPLIC. NO E011 OF 2024 RULING PAGE 6 OF 9 amount as prayed for by the applicant in its application.” 14.In light of the foregoing, the court will allow the interest charge at 14% per annum in accordance with Rule 7 of the Advocates (Remuneration) Order. 15. In conclusion, the Notice of Motion dated 20th February 2026 is hereby allowed as follows: a. Judgment is hereby entered in favour of the Applicant against the Respondent for the sum of Kshs.181,650/= as provided in Section 51(2) of the Advocates Act. b. The sum of Kshs.181,650/= shall be paid with interest at 14% per annum from 4th June 2024 until paid in full. c. A decree shall be issued as set out above; and d. The Respondent will bear the costs of the application. Orders accordingly. Dated, Signed and Delivered virtually at Nakuru this 17th Day of July, 2026. ANNA NGIBUINI MWAURE JUDGE MSC APPLIC. NO E011 OF 2024 RULING PAGE 7 OF 9 ORDER In view of the declaration of measures restricting Court operations due to the COVID-19 pandemic and in light of the directions issued by His Lordship, the Chief Justice on 15th March 2020 and subsequent directions of 21st April 2020 that judgments and rulings shall be delivered through video conferencing or via email. They have waived compliance with Order 21 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules, which requires that all judgments and rulings be pronounced in open Court. In permitting this course, this Court has been guided by Article 159(2)(d) of the Constitution which requires the Court to eschew undue technicalities in delivering justice, the right of access to justice guaranteed to every person under Article 48 of the Constitution and the provisions of Section 1B of the Civil Procedure Act (Chapter 21 of the Laws of Kenya) which impose on this Court the duty of the Court, inter alia, to use suitable technology to enhance the overriding objective which is to facilitate just, expeditious, proportionate and affordable resolution of civil disputes. A signed copy will be availed to each party upon payment of Court fees. ANNA NGIBUINI MWAURE JUDGE MSC APPLIC. NO E011 OF 2024 RULING PAGE 8 OF 9 MSC APPLIC. NO E011 OF 2024 RULING PAGE 9 OF 9