[2003] KEHC 902 (KLR)
The court found that the appellant's application had been dismissed with costs, and the order for costs was clear from the prior ruling. The Bill of Costs was properly filed and served on the appellant, who failed to raise any specific objections to its items. The appellant's general denial of liability and...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2003] KEHC 902 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Gilbert Kanyeki Muchemi; Respondent: Robert Maina Muchemi
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nyeri
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- ? 82 of 1993
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Ruling on Assessment of Bill of Costs
- Outcome
- Bill of Costs allowed as drawn; appellant to pay respondent Kshs.150,835/- as costs.
- Legal Topics
- Costs Award, Bill of Costs Assessment, Appeal Dismissal
- 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
Gilbert Kanyeki Muchemi
Appellant
Robert Maina Muchemi
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Assessment of Bill of Costs
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appellant is liable to pay the respondent's costs following the dismissal of the appeal.
- 2 Whether the Bill of Costs as drawn should be assessed and allowed in full.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the appellant's application had been dismissed with costs, and the order for costs was clear from the prior ruling. The Bill of Costs was properly filed and served on the appellant, who failed to raise any specific objections to its items. The appellant's general denial of liability and non-recognition of the Bill did not constitute a valid challenge. Accordingly, the court assessed and allowed the Bill of Costs as drawn, holding the appellant liable to pay the respondent Kshs.150,835/- as costs of the appeal.
Court Disposition
Bill of Costs allowed as drawn; appellant to pay respondent Kshs.150,835/- as costs.
Orders
- The Bill of Costs dated 4th June 2003 is allowed and assessed at Kshs.150,835/- against the appellant for the respondent.
- Right of appeal within 28 days.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
28 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NYERI
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 82 OF 1993
GILBERT KANYEKI MUCHEMI ………………………………….. PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
ROBERT MAINA MUCHEMI ………………………………………. DEFENDANT
19/9/2003
Coram: Before J.N. Muniu – DR
Cc Mwangi
Mugo for applicant
Respondent in person
Mugo – The matter is from our Bill of Costs dated 4th June 2003. It is drawn to scale and it is totaling to Kshs.150,835/-. I pray that the same be assessed as drawn.
Respondent – The case was a Succession Case. I don’t understand why I should pay the costs. I only require my parcel of land. I am the one who had brought up the case. I don’t recognise the Bill of Costs.
Mugo – The respondent was served with the Bill. He has not pointed out any particular item. The court awarded costs on 11/2/2003. Coming up for a hearing of an application by the respondent. The application was dismissed with costs. That marked the matter as settled. The matter was before J.V.O. Juma (Justice). Ruling was delivered on 11/2/2003 where the respondent’s application was dismissed with costs. The applicant is entitled to costs.
J.N. MUNIU
DR
19/9/2003
Court – Ruling on 3/10/2003.
J.N. MUNIU
DR
19/9/2003
RULING
On 19th September 2003, the matter was coming up for the assessment of the Bill of Costs for the respondent against the appellants. The respondent’s counsel prayed that the same be assessed at Kshs.150,835/-. The Appellant claims that he is the one who had brought up the case, and was indeed not entitled to pay any costs. He says that the matter was for Succession. He did not therefore recognise any Bill of Costs.
From the Ruling of the court, in High Court Civil Appeal No. 82 of 1993, the appellant/respondent had filed in Court of Appeal to set aside the award filed and ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, in the lower court vide SRM’s Succession Suit No. 78/93. The Appeal was dismissed with costs for Leave of merit. It is therefore ordered that the appellant is entitled to bear the costs of the suit. The present Bill of Costs was filed and the same was served upon the appellant. There has been no serious challenge and the appellant did not point out any item that he was disputing. He made wholesale averments of nonrecognition of the Bill. I proceed to allow the Bill of Costs and the same is assessed at Kshs.150,835/- against the Appellant for the Respondents in the Appeal.
Right of Appeal within 28 days.
J.N. MUNIU
DEPUTY REGISTRAR
3/10/2003