Integrity Security Group (EA) Ltd v Simiyu t/a Silk Sports Lounge (Civil Suit E013 of 2025) [2026] KEMC 558 (KLR) (16 July 2026) (Ruling)
The court applied the Advocates (Remuneration) Order and the cited authority to disallow unsupported and non-permissible items, allowed only those items justified by proof or scale, and therefore taxed the Plaintiff’s Party and Party Bill of Costs at Kshs. 135,300/=.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2026] KEMC 558 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: INTEGRITY SECURITY GROUP (EA) LTD; Defendant: STEPHEN KAISER SIMIYU T/A SILK SPORTS LOUNGE
- Court
- Magistrate's Court
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Suit E013 of 2025
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Suit – Party and Party Bill of Costs / Ruling on Taxation/assessment of the Plaintiff’s Party and Party Bill of Costs Dated 17th April 2026
- Outcome
- Plaintiff’s Party and Party Bill of Costs allowed in part and assessed at Kshs. 135,300/=.
- Judges
- ["TO Omono"]
- Legal Topics
- Party and Party Costs, Taxation of Bill of Costs, VAT on Costs, Filing Fees, Service of Process, Attendances, Affidavit Filing Fees
- 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
INTEGRITY SECURITY GROUP (EA) LTD
Plaintiff
STEPHEN KAISER SIMIYU T/A SILK SPORTS LOUNGE
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit – Party and Party Bill of Costs / Ruling on Taxation/assessment of the Plaintiff’s Party and Party Bill of Costs Dated 17th April 2026
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Plaintiff’s Bill of Costs was properly taxable and what items were allowable
- 2 Whether VAT, filing fees, service charges, attendances, and affidavit filing items were payable
- 3 What total amount should be awarded as taxed costs
Ratio Decidendi
The court applied the Advocates (Remuneration) Order and the cited authority to disallow unsupported and non-permissible items, allowed only those items justified by proof or scale, and therefore taxed the Plaintiff’s Party and Party Bill of Costs at Kshs. 135,300/=.
Court Disposition
Plaintiff’s Party and Party Bill of Costs allowed in part and assessed at Kshs. 135,300/=.
Orders
- Item B on VAT taxed off.
- Item 1 on filing fees taxed off.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
**REPUBLIC OF KENYA** **IN THE CHIEF MAGISTRATE’S COURT AT BUNGOMA** **CIVIL SUIT NO. E013 OF 2025** **INTEGRITY SECURITY GROUP (EA) LTD……………….………………….PLAINTIFF** **VERSUS** **STEPHEN KAISER SIMIYU T/A SILK SPORTS LOUNGE……………...DEFENDANT** **RULING** 1. This ruling determines the Plaintiff’s Party and Party Bill of Costs dated 17th April 2026. 2. This court has given due regard to the Plaintiff’s Bill of Costs as well as the Defendant’s written submissions on record. 3. The items not permissible under the law and those opposed by the Defendant were assessed as hereunder **Value Added Tax** 1. Item B was assessed off in line with the holding in **Pyramid Motors Limited vs Langata Gardens Limited (2015) eKLR.** **Filing Fees** 1. Item 1 was assessed off since the said item is not provided under schedule 7 of the Advocates (Remuneration) Order (ARO). In any event, there is no evidence on record that the Plaintiff paid his counsel Kshs. 39,062/= for the demand letter. 2. Item 3 was assessed off for want of proof. **Service** 1. Items 6 and 7 were assessed at Kshs. 2,000/= considering the distance between Bungoma and Webuye, and per schedule 7(6) of the Advocates (Remuneration) Order (ARO). 2. Items 8 – 11 were assessed off since there was no need for the Plaintiff’s counsel to serve the Defendant’s counsel with the hearing and mention notices on those occasions since the Defendant’s counsel attended court on all those occasions. **Attendances** 1. Item 22 was assessed off since there is no evidence on record of such a sitting taking place. 2. Items 21, 23, and 25 were assessed at Kshs. 1,400/= each per schedule 7(6) of the Advocates (Remuneration) Order (ARO). 3. Item 26 was assessed as drawn since the said item was drawn to scale. **Filing of Affidavits** 1. Items 33 – 36 were assessed off in line with this court’s finding in paragraph 8 above. **DETERMINATION** 1. The upshot of the foregoing is that the Plaintiff’s Party and Party Bill of Costs dated 17th April 2026 is assessed at Kshs. 135,300/=. **Read, signed, and delivered in open court at Bungoma, this 16th day of July 2026** **T.O. OMONO** **SENIOR RESIDENT MAGISTRATE** **In the presence of:** Mr. Bwonchiri for the Plaintiff C/A: Rioba