[2000] KECA 94 (KLR)
The Deputy Registrar found that the amount of KShs.420,000 claimed for instructions was excessive and not reasonable, given that the application for stay of execution was withdrawn before being heard on its merits. The court considered the actual work done, including the fact that the matter was only adjourned and...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2000] KECA 94 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: John Kimani Njonge; Applicant: Kimani Waweru; Applicant: Muikamba Kinyanjui; Respondent: Boro Kinyua; Respondent: George Githae Nding'uri; Respondent: Allan Muthama; Respondent: Nding'uri Migwi; Respondent: Karanja Njoroge; Respondent: Abraham Wangai; Respondent: Wachira Nding'uri
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Court Station
- Court of Appeal at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- ? 235 of 1996
- Procedural Posture
- Stay Application / Taxation of Costs After Withdrawal of Application
- Outcome
- bill of costs taxed; excessive claim disallowed; reasonable sum awarded
- Legal Topics
- Taxation of Costs, Withdrawal of Application, Stay of Execution
- 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
John Kimani Njonge
Applicant
Kimani Waweru
Applicant
Muikamba Kinyanjui
Applicant
Boro Kinyua
Respondent
George Githae Nding'uri
Respondent
Allan Muthama
Respondent
Nding'uri Migwi
Respondent
Karanja Njoroge
Respondent
Abraham Wangai
Respondent
Wachira Nding'uri
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Stay Application / Taxation of Costs After Withdrawal of Application
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the amount claimed in the bill of costs is reasonable given the application was withdrawn before hearing on merits.
- 2 Whether the respondents are entitled to the full amount claimed for instructions and profit costs.
Ratio Decidendi
The Deputy Registrar found that the amount of KShs.420,000 claimed for instructions was excessive and not reasonable, given that the application for stay of execution was withdrawn before being heard on its merits. The court considered the actual work done, including the fact that the matter was only adjourned and never substantively argued, and determined that KShs.20,000 was a reasonable sum for instructions. The remainder of the bill was taxed accordingly, and items related to profit costs and attendance were disallowed as more than a quarter of the profit costs claimed was disallowed. The total taxed costs were set at KShs.21,155, inclusive of the taxing fee.
Court Disposition
bill of costs taxed; excessive claim disallowed; reasonable sum awarded
Orders
- The bill of costs filed by the respondents' advocates is taxed at KShs.21,155 inclusive of taxing fee.
- KShs.400,000 is taxed off from the instructions item.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
14 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI CORAM: LUVUGA, D.R. (IN CHAMBERS) CIVIL APPLICATION NO. NAI 235 OF 1996 (83/96 UR) BETWEEN
JOHN KIMANI NJONGE KIMANI WAWERU MUIKAMBA KINYANJUI ...................................................................................................................APPLICANTS
AND
BORO KINYUA GEORGE GITHAE NDING'URI ALLAN MUTHAMA NDING'URI MIGWI KARANJA NJOROGE ABRAHAM WANGAI WACHIRA NDING'URI ..............................................................................................................RESPONDENTS
(Application for stay of execution in a intended appeal from a ruling of the High Court of Kenya at Nairobi (Bosire J) dated 15th November, 1995 in H.C.C.C. NO. 1741 OF 1995) ***************** RULING ON TAXATION
The taxation before me arises out of an application which was withdrawn in Court on 2. 5.1997. The application was for stay of execution. Mr Mwangi, counsel for the respondents, submitted that the matter involved great public importance.
It also involved taking instructions from the respondents and other members of the public and the same was heard for two days being withdrawn on the last day of hearing.
I have perused the record and read the notes of the proceedings in court. On 24. 10. 96 when the application first came for hearing, the same was adjourned and stood over generally and on 2. 5.97 the application was withdrawn. It is clear therefore, that at no time the application was heard on merits though I take note that it was withdrawn in court.
Taking all the facts in this application into consideration, I am satisfied that the amount of KShs.420,000/= claimed on item one of the bill is far much excessive and cannot be said to be reasonable. I consider a sum of KShs.20,000/= to be reasonable which I award and tax off KShs.400,000/= from this item. All other items have been considered and taxed.
In the result, the bill of costs filed by the Advocates for the respondents on 22. 8.97 is taxed at KShs.20,945/= which is to be added a sum of KShs.210/= taxing fee making in all KShs.21,155/=. Since more than the quarter of the profit costs claimed is disallowed it follows that items 26, 27 of the bill including the attendance before me is disallowed.
Dated at Nairobi this 8th day of February, 2000.
T. S. LUVUGA --------------- DEPUTY REGISTRAR
I certify that this is a true copy of the original.
DEPUTY REGISTRAR