https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kemc/2026/613
The court assessed the Plaintiff’s bill at Kshs. 66,650/= but reduced the recoverable amount to Kshs. 53,320/= because liability had been apportioned 80%:20% in the Plaintiff’s favour, and only the successful portion of costs was recoverable; VAT was disallowed since there was no taxable supply between the litigants.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2026] KEMC 613 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Kevin Khisa Juma; Defendant: Albrima General Cargo Limited
- Court
- Magistrate's Court
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Case E176 of 2025
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Case / Ruling on Party and Party Bill of Costs
- Outcome
- Plaintiff’s Party and Party Bill of Costs allowed in part and taxed down
- Judges
- ["TO Omono"]
- Legal Topics
- Party and Party Bill of Costs, Instruction Fees, VAT on Costs, Assessment of Costs, Apportionment of Costs
- 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
Kevin Khisa Juma
Plaintiff
Albrima General Cargo Limited
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Case / Ruling on Party and Party Bill of Costs
Legal Issues
- 1 What amount should be awarded on the Plaintiff’s Party and Party Bill of Costs dated 23rd March 2026
- 2 Whether VAT was chargeable on the costs
- 3 How the apportionment of liability affected the final costs payable
Ratio Decidendi
The court assessed the Plaintiff’s bill at Kshs. 66,650/= but reduced the recoverable amount to Kshs. 53,320/= because liability had been apportioned 80%:20% in the Plaintiff’s favour, and only the successful portion of costs was recoverable; VAT was disallowed since there was no taxable supply between the litigants.
Court Disposition
Plaintiff’s Party and Party Bill of Costs allowed in part and taxed down
Orders
- Party and Party Bill of Costs dated 23rd March 2026 assessed at Kshs. 66,650/=
- Further reduced to Kshs. 53,320/= to reflect the 80%:20% apportionment of liability in favour of the Plaintiff
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
Juma v Albrima General Cargo Limited (Civil Case E176 of 2025) [2026] KEMC 613 (KLR) (21 July 2026) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2026] KEMC 613 (KLR) Republic of Kenya In the Bungoma Law Courts Civil Case E176 of 2025 TO Omono, SRM July 21, 2026 Between Kevin Khisa Juma Plaintiff and Albrima General Cargo Limited Defendant Ruling 1.This ruling determines the Plaintiff’s Party and Party Bill of Costs dated 23rd March 2026. Instruction Fees 2.The value of the subject matter herein is Kshs. 94,272/=. The Defendant neither entered appearance nor filed a Statement of Defence. This matter proceeded by way of formal proof. In such instances, Schedule 7(1)(a) of the Advocates (Remuneration) Order (ARO) provides for 65% of instruction fees pegged on the lower scale. 3.The minimum instruction fees will, therefore, work out as follows: 65% of Kshs. 15,000/= which equals Kshs. 9,750/=. 4.Considering the nature of the suit and time taken to conclude the same, this court assessed item A at Kshs. 15,000/=. Value Added Tax 5.VAT is chargeable where a party supplies taxable goods or services to another party. There was no taxable supply of goods and services between the Plaintiff and the Defendants. The costs arising from this ruling are not the Plaintiff’s counsel’s income which attracts VAT but the Plaintiff’s costs of the suit. The costs of the suit due to the Plaintiff herein cannot thus attract VAT. 6.Therefore, item B was assessed off in line with the holding in Pyramid Motors Limited vs Langata Gardens Limited (2015) eKLR and Kenya Commercial Bank Limited v Stagecoach Management Limited [2017] eKLR. Filing Fees 7.Items 1, 3 – 5 were assessed as drawn per the receipts on record. 8.Item 2 was assessed off for want of proof. Service 9.Item 6 was assessed off for want of proof. 10.Items 7 – 14 were assessed at Kshs. 2,500/= each given the distance between Bungoma and Malaba and per Schedule 7(10)(i) of the ARO. Attendances 11.Item 18 was assessed off since neither the Plaintiff nor his counsel attended court on that occasion. Drawing and Filing of Affidavits of Service 12.Items 25 – 33 were assessed at Kshs. 1,000/= each as drawn per schedule 7(11) of the ARO. Determination 13.The upshot of the foregoing is that the Plaintiff’s Party and Party Bill of Costs dated 23rd March 2026 is assessed at Kshs. 66,650/=. 14.However, it is noteworthy that liability in this matter was apportioned in the ratio of 80%:20% in favour of the Plaintiff. 15.Note 3 under Schedule 7 of the ARO provides thus:Where success in a suit is divided, the scale may be distributed having regard to partial success on either side. 16.Given the above authority, the costs due to the Plaintiff are Kshs. 53,320/= READ, SIGNED, AND DELIVERED IN OPEN COURT AT BUNGOMA THIS 21ST DAY OF JULY 2026T.O. OMONOSENIOR RESIDENT MAGISTRATEIn the presence of:Mr. Bw’onchiri for the PlaintiffC/A: Mr. Rioba