[2009] KEHC 1126 (KLR)

[2009] KEHC 1126 (KLR)

The court held that since the certificate of taxation issued by the Taxing Officer had not been challenged by the respondent under the applicable rules, it was final and conclusive as to the amount of costs due. The respondent's opposition to the application was rejected because there was no evidence of payment or...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2009] KEHC 1126 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Kantai & Co. Advocates; Respondent: Thomas Njunge t/a Njunge Industrial Enterprises Company
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Children Miscellaneous Application 854 of 2005
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Judgment Under Section 51 of the Advocates Act
Outcome
application granted
Judges
JM Khamoni
Legal Topics
Taxation of Costs, Certificate of Taxation, Advocate Client Costs
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Taxation of Costs Certificate of Taxation Advocate Client Costs

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kantai & Co. Advocates

Applicant

Thomas Njunge t/a Njunge Industrial Enterprises Company

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Judgment Under Section 51 of the Advocates Act

  1. 1 Whether the certificate of taxation issued by the Taxing Officer is final and conclusive in the absence of a challenge under paragraph 11 of the Advocates Remuneration Rules.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant is entitled to judgment for the taxed costs under section 51 of the Advocates Act.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that since the certificate of taxation issued by the Taxing Officer had not been challenged by the respondent under the applicable rules, it was final and conclusive as to the amount of costs due. The respondent's opposition to the application was rejected because there was no evidence of payment or any valid challenge to the certificate. Accordingly, the applicant was entitled to judgment for the amount certified in the certificate of taxation.

Court Disposition

application granted

Orders

  • The Notice of Motion dated 18th August 2008 is granted as prayed.