https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2026/1352

https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2026/1352

Although the applicant had not filed a formal Reference under Paragraph 11, the court found sufficient cause to invoke its discretion because the applicant explained illness, lack of access to the phone used for service, and financial distress, while also producing insolvency-related correspondence. The court...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2026] KEELRC 1352 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant/respondent: Gakoi Maina & Co. Advocates; Respondent/applicant: Mary Gathecha Wanjiru
Court
Employment and Labour Relations Court
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Miscellaneous Application E171 of 2024
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application for Leave to File Reference Out of Time, Stay of Execution, and Setting Aside of Taxation Ruling / Ruling on Application
Outcome
Application allowed
Judges
["CN Baari"]
Legal Topics
Taxation of Advocate Client Bill of Costs, Reference Under Paragraph 11 of the Advocates (remuneration) Order, Extension of Time, Setting Aside Ex Parte Proceedings, Stay of Execution, Whats App Service, Insolvency Act
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Advocates' Remuneration Employment and Labour Relations Taxation of Advocate Client Bill of Costs Reference Under Paragraph 11 of the Advocates (remuneration) Order Extension of Time Setting Aside Ex Parte Proceedings Stay of Execution +2 more

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 5 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gakoi Maina & Co. Advocates

Applicant/respondent

Mary Gathecha Wanjiru

Respondent/applicant

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application for Leave to File Reference Out of Time, Stay of Execution, and Setting Aside of Taxation Ruling / Ruling on Application

  1. 1 Whether the court had jurisdiction to entertain the application absent a formal Reference under Paragraph 11 of the Advocates (Remuneration) Order
  2. 2 Whether sufficient cause was shown to warrant leave to file a Reference out of time and stay of execution
  3. 3 Whether the applicant should be allowed to challenge the taxation ruling despite prior service and failure to file a response

Ratio Decidendi

Although the applicant had not filed a formal Reference under Paragraph 11, the court found sufficient cause to invoke its discretion because the applicant explained illness, lack of access to the phone used for service, and financial distress, while also producing insolvency-related correspondence. The court therefore treated the matter as one warranting leave out of time, preserved the applicant’s right to be heard on the taxation, and stayed execution pending the intended Reference.

Court Disposition

Application allowed

Orders

  • The applicant is granted leave to file and serve a Reference against the taxation ruling dated 13th August 2024 within fourteen (14) days from the date of the ruling.
  • There shall be a stay of execution of the taxed costs pending the hearing and determination of the intended Reference.