[2024] KEHC 14557 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant's bill of costs had been taxed and a certificate of costs issued in its favour, and that the respondent had not challenged or set aside the certificate. Section 51(2) of the Advocates Act makes such a certificate final as to the amount of costs, and the court is empowered to enter...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2024] KEHC 14557 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Kinyanjui Njuguna & Co. Advocates; Respondent: Directline Assurance Company Limited
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Application E403 of 2023
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Advocate's Notice of Motion for Judgment on Taxed Costs
- Outcome
- application allowed; judgment entered for applicant for taxed costs plus interest
- Judges
- PM Mulwa
- Legal Topics
- Taxation of Costs, Advocate Remuneration, Certificate of Taxation, Interest on 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
Kinyanjui Njuguna & Co. Advocates
Applicant
Directline Assurance Company Limited
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Advocate's Notice of Motion for Judgment on Taxed Costs
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether judgment should be entered for the applicant based on a certificate of taxation that has not been set aside or altered.
- 2 Whether the applicant is entitled to interest at 14% per annum on the taxed costs from the expiration of one month after delivery of the bill.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant's bill of costs had been taxed and a certificate of costs issued in its favour, and that the respondent had not challenged or set aside the certificate. Section 51(2) of the Advocates Act makes such a certificate final as to the amount of costs, and the court is empowered to enter judgment for the certified sum. The applicant was also entitled to interest at 14% per annum from one month after delivery of the bill, as provided by Rule 7 of the Advocates (Remuneration) Order 2014, since the claim for interest was made before payment. The respondent's failure to respond or oppose the application further justified granting the orders sought.
Court Disposition
application allowed; judgment entered for applicant for taxed costs plus interest
Orders
- Judgment is entered for the applicant for Kshs.179,959.00 against the respondent.
- The respondent shall pay interest on the sum at 14% per annum from 3rd May 2023 until payment in full.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
25 paragraphs
Kinyanjui Njuguna & Co. Advocates v Directline Assurance Company Limited (Miscellaneous Application E403 of 2023) [2024] KEHC 14557 (KLR) (Commercial and Tax) (19 November 2024) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2024] KEHC 14557 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
Commercial and Tax
Miscellaneous Application E403 of 2023
PM Mulwa, J
November 19, 2024
Between
Kinyanjui Njuguna & Co. Advocates
Applicant
and
Directline Assurance Company Limited
Respondent
Ruling
1. Before the court for determination is the Advocate’s Notice of Motion application dated 18th October 2023 filed pursuant to Order 51, Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules, Section 52 of the Advocates Act and Rule 7 of the Advocates (Remuneration) Order 2014.
2. The Advocate prayed for judgement to be entered for Kshs.179,959. 00 plus interest on the amount at 14% per annum from 3rd May 2023 until payment in full.
3. The grounds were that the Advocate's bill of costs in this matter had been taxed and a certificate of costs issued and that the client had continually neglected to pay legal fees duly earned despite demand and notice by the plaintiff.
4. The Client neglected to file a response to the instant application despite the court granting it an opportunity to do so. There is an affidavit of service on record indicating that the Client was served with the court directions but opted not to act on the same. The application is therefore no opposed.
Analysis and determination 5. Section 51(2) of the Advocates Act states:“The certificate of the taxing officer by whom any bill has been taxed shall, unless it is set aside or altered by the Court, be final as to the amount of the costs covered thereby, and the Court may make such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit, including, in a case where the retainer is not disputed, an order that judgment be entered for the sum certified to be due with costs.”
6. In this case the Advocate’s bill of costs dated 22nd May 2023 was taxed in favour of the Advocate as against the Client in the sum of Kshs.179,959. 00. Consequently, a certificate of taxation for the said sum was issued by the Deputy Registrar on 5th October 2023.
7. Guided by Section 51(2) of the Advocates Act, I find no reason not to enter judgment for the sum specified in the aforementioned certificate of costs.
8. As for interest, Rule 7 of the Advocates (Remuneration) Order 2014 permits an advocate to charge 14% interest in his fees. It states:“An advocate may charge interest at 14 per cent per annum on his disbursements and costs, whether by scale or otherwise, from the expiration of one month from the delivery of his bill to the client, provided that such claim for interest is raised before the amount of the bill shall have been paid or tendered in full.”
9. Based on the foregoing, I find merit in the application and grant the prayers as sought. Similar orders to apply equally in Miscellaneous Application Nos. E400 of 2023, E401 of 2023 and E402 of 2023 for the respective applications.It is so ordered.
RULING DELIVERED VIRTUALLY, DATED AND SIGNED AT NAIROBI THIS 19TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2024. ………………………P.MULWAJUDGEIn the presence of:Ms. Gathara for advocate/appellantN/A for client/respondentCourt Assistant: Carlos