[2012] KEHC 4335 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant had established that the certificate of taxation was issued for the sum of Kshs.58,743.40, that the retainer was not disputed, and that the respondent had not challenged the certificate or responded to the application. Under Section 51(2) of the Advocates Act, the certificate of...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2012] KEHC 4335 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Iseme Kamau & Maema Advocates; Respondent: Concord Insurance Company Ltd
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nakuru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Civil Application 3 of 2011
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Civil Application / Ruling on Application for Judgment on Taxed Costs
- Outcome
- Judgment entered for the applicant as prayed in the Notice of Motion.
- Judges
- RPV Wendoh
- Legal Topics
- Advocate Client Costs, Certificate of Taxation, Execution of Judgment
- 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
Iseme Kamau & Maema Advocates
Applicant
Concord Insurance Company Ltd
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Civil Application / Ruling on Application for Judgment on Taxed Costs
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to judgment for the amount certified in the certificate of taxation.
- 2 Whether the certificate of taxation is final and conclusive under Section 51(2) of the Advocates Act where it is not challenged.
- 3 Whether the applicant is entitled to execute against the respondent for the taxed costs.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant had established that the certificate of taxation was issued for the sum of Kshs.58,743.40, that the retainer was not disputed, and that the respondent had not challenged the certificate or responded to the application. Under Section 51(2) of the Advocates Act, the certificate of taxation is final as to the amount unless set aside or altered by the court. Since there was no challenge or dispute, the court held that the applicant was entitled to judgment for the amount certified and to execute against the respondent. Costs of the application were also awarded to the applicant.
Court Disposition
Judgment entered for the applicant as prayed in the Notice of Motion.
Orders
- Judgment is entered in favour of the applicant against the respondent for Kshs.58,743.40 as set out in the certificate of taxation.
- The applicant is at liberty to execute against the respondent for the said sum.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
24 paragraphs
[if gte mso 9]><xml>
Normal 0
false false false
EN-GB X-NONE X-NONE
MicrosoftInternetExplorer4
</xml><![endif][if gte mso 9]><![endif][if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:\"Table Normal\"; mso-style-parent:\"\"; font-size:11. 0pt;\"Calibri\",\"sans-serif\"; mso-fareast-\"Times New Roman\"; mso-bidi-\"Times New Roman\";} </style> <![endif]
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT
AT NAKURU
MISCELLANEOUS CIVIL APPLICATION 3 OF 2011
ISEME KAMAU & MAEMA ADVOCATES………APPLICANT
VERSUS
CONCORD INSURANCE COMPANY LTD…....RESPONDENT
RULING
By the Notice of Motion dated 13/12/2011 brought pursuant to Section 51(2) of the Advocates Act Cap 16 Laws of Kenya and Order 51 Rule 1, Iseme Kamau, Maema Advocates seek an order that judgment be entered herein in favour of the applicant against Concord Insurance Company Ltd, the respondent, in the sum of Kshs.58,753. 40 as set out in the certificate of taxation issued by the taxing officer of this court on 24/8/2011 and that the applicant be at liberty to execute against the respondent.
The grounds upon which the application is premised are that the applicant was instructed to pursue recovery of Kshs.224,945/- in a material damage recovery claim, the applicant filed PMCC No. 2/2003 and the respondent failed to settle the applicant’s fees. The applicant lodged a bill of costs in Nakuru HCMISC. 3/2011, it was taxed on 28/7/2011 at Kshs.58,743. 40 as a result of which a certificate of taxation (KWA) was issued. It is the applicant’s contention that in accordance with Section 51(2) of the Advocates Act, the certificate is final and has not been challenged. Ms Karen Mate an advocate from the firm of Iseme Kamau & Co. Advocates also deposed that the retainer between the applicant and respondent is not contested.
The respondents were served with this application on 3/2/2012. Service was duly acknowledged by the respondent stamping on the application that was served. Vihaki Armstone, swore an affidavit of service dated 7/5/2012. The respondent did not file any reply nor was there any appearance at the hearing of the application. The same is not challenged. For these reasons, I hereby enter judgment for the applicant in terms of prayers 1 and 2 of the Notice of Motion as prayed. The applicant will also have costs of the application.
DATED and DELIVERED this 14th day of May, 2012.
R.P.V. WENDOH
JUDGE
PRESENT:
Ms Maija holding brief for Ms Mate for the applicant.
N/A for the respondent.
Kennedy – Court Clerk.