https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2026/1965

Kiugu t/a Kiugu & Co Advocates v County Government of Kambu (Miscellaneous Application E137 of 2022) [2026] KEELRC 1965 (KLR) (7 July 2026) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2026] KEELRC 1965 (KLR) Republic of Kenya In the Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nairobi Miscellaneous Application E137 of 2022 BOM Manani, J July 7, 2026 Between Geoffrey Muriungi Kiugu T/A Kiugu & Co Advocates Applicant and The County Government Of Kambu Respondent Ruling Background 1.The Applicant moved the court through the application dated 23rd October 2025 seeking judgment for Ksh. 6,750,072.84 in terms of the Certificate of Taxation dated 7th February 2024. He also prayed for interest on the amount at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of the taxation ruling (22nd January 2024) and costs of the application. 2.The Applicant avers that the Taxing Master awarded him the aforesaid amount as fees and issued him with the requisite Certificate of Taxation. However, he avers that the Respondent has neglected to pay the amount thus necessitating this application to enable him to enforce recovery. 3.The Applicant avers that there is no dispute regarding his retainer. He further contends that the Certificate of Taxation has not been challenged or set aside. As such, it is his case that it (the Certificate of Taxation) represents the final pronouncement regarding what is due to him from the Respondent in legal fees and that he is entitled to judgment for the amount therein in terms of section 51(2) of the Advocates Act. 4.The Respondent has filed a replying affidavit dated 27th January 2026 to partially oppose the application. The affidavit is sworn by one Elizabeth Kibathi, the Respondent’s Deputy Director in charge of Litigation and Prosecution (hereafter referred to as the affiant). 5.The affiant acknowledges the amount in the Certificate of Costs as due and owing to the Applicant. However, she contends that the failure by the Respondent to pay the costs to the Applicant is not out of willful neglect of its obligation in this respect but due to financial constraints. 6.Whilst the Respondent does not dispute the obligation to settle the taxed costs, it is opposed to the request for interest on the amount. According to it, the Taxing Master did not award the Applicant the interest he now seeks to recover on the costs. 7.The Respondent contends that the Applicant did not, in any event, demand for payment of the taxed costs until 24th January 2025. As such, it avers that if the court has to award interest on the amount, such interest should run from 7th March 2025 (30 days from the date of the demand) and not earlier. 8.The Respondent has further opposed the Applicant’s request for costs of the application. It contends that since it has raised genuine objections to the Applicant’s claim for interest, he should not be awarded costs of the application. In the Respondent’s view, it will be unjust to condemn it to pay costs of the application. Analysis 9.Section 51(2) of the Advocates Act provides as follows:-‘’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.’’ 10.This provision allows the court to enter judgment in terms of a Taxing Master’s Certificate of Taxation as long as the taxation order has not been set aside or varied through a reference application and if there is no contest regarding the retainer. In the instant case, the parties agree that the Respondent did not file a reference against the taxation order. Further, they agree that there is no contest regarding the Applicant’s retainer. 11.In the premises, the Applicant is entitled to judgment in terms of the Certificate of Taxation dated 7th February 2024. Consequently, judgment is hereby entered for the Applicant against the Respondent for the sum of Ksh. 6,750,072.84 as per the aforesaid Certificate of Taxation. 12.The Applicant further prayed for interest on the aforesaid amount at the rate of 12% per annum from 22nd January 2024. He also sought costs of the application. 13.However, in his (the Applicant’s) written submissions in support of the application, he abandoned these two requests. That being the case, the court considers the two requests as withdrawn and or abandoned. Conclusion 14.After evaluating the application dated 23rd October 2025, the affidavit evidence and submissions by the parties against the applicable law, the court makes the following findings and attendant orders:-a.The court enters judgment for the Applicant against the Respondent for the sum of Ksh. 6,750,072.84 as per the Certificate of Taxation dated 7th February 2024.b.The court orders that each party shall bear own costs of the application. DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED ON THE 7TH DAY OF JULY, 2026B. O. M. MANANIJUDGEIn the presence of:…………….for the Applicant…………….for the RespondentOrderIn light of the directions issued on 12th July 2022 by her Ladyship, the Chief Justice with respect to online court proceedings, this decision has been delivered to the parties online with their consent, the parties having waived compliance with Rule 28 (3) of the ELRC Procedure Rules which requires that all judgments and rulings shall be dated, signed and delivered in the open court.