[2024] KEHC 13758 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant was duly instructed by the respondent and rendered legal services, resulting in a taxed bill of Kshs. 133,290. The respondent was served with the bill of costs and the certificate of taxation but failed to pay, dispute the retainer, or challenge the certificate. Section 51(2) of...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2024] KEHC 13758 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Kinyua & Maingi & Co Advocates; Respondent: Trident Insurance Co Limited
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nakuru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Application E337 of 2023
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Judgment on Certified Costs
- Outcome
- application allowed; judgment entered for applicant for certified costs, with interest and costs of the application
- Judges
- PN Gichohi
- Legal Topics
- Taxation of Costs, Certificate of Taxation, Advocate Remuneration, Judgment Entry
- 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
Kinyua & Maingi & Co Advocates
Applicant
Trident Insurance Co Limited
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Judgment on Certified Costs
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether judgment should be entered for the applicant against the respondent for the certified taxed costs.
- 2 Whether the applicant is entitled to interest on the taxed sum as per the Advocates (Remuneration) Order.
- 3 Whether the respondent has disputed the retainer or challenged the certificate of taxation.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant was duly instructed by the respondent and rendered legal services, resulting in a taxed bill of Kshs. 133,290. The respondent was served with the bill of costs and the certificate of taxation but failed to pay, dispute the retainer, or challenge the certificate. Section 51(2) of the Advocates Act provides that such a certificate is final unless set aside or altered, and the court may enter judgment for the certified sum where the retainer is not disputed. The respondent did not oppose the application. The court also found that the applicant is entitled to interest at 14% per annum as provided under the Advocates (Remuneration) Order, calculable after 30...
Court Disposition
application allowed; judgment entered for applicant for certified costs, with interest and costs of the application
Orders
- Judgment is entered in favour of the applicant against the respondent in the sum of Kshs. 133,290.
- The applicant is awarded interest on the sum at 14% per annum calculable after 30 days from the date the respondent was served with the bill of costs until payment in full.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
26 paragraphs
Kinyua & Maingi & Co Advocates v Trident Insurance Co Limited (Miscellaneous Application E337 of 2023) [2024] KEHC 13758 (KLR) (6 November 2024) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2024] KEHC 13758 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Nakuru
Miscellaneous Application E337 of 2023
PN Gichohi, J
November 6, 2024
Between
Kinyua & Maingi & Co Advocates
Applicant
and
Trident Insurance Co Limited
Respondent
Ruling
1. The Applicant herein has moved this Court by a Notice of Motion application dated 10th April, 2024 and brought under Section 51 (2) of the Advocates Act Cap 16 Laws of Kenya seeking orders that:-1. Judgment be entered in favour of the Applicant against the Respondent the sum of Kshs. 133,290/= being the certified costs due to the Applicant as against the Respondent .2. The Respondent does pay to the Applicant the costs of the application together with interest on the taxed sum.
2. The grounds are on the face of the application supported by the Affidavit sworn by Njoki Kinyua Advocate on 10th April, 2024. It is deponed that the Respondent instructed the firm of Kinyua & Maingi & Co. Advocates to act for the Defendant in Nakuru CMCC No. E228 of 2021 Brian Kipkoech Kibet vs Ng’eno Kimtai & another . However, the Respondent failed to pay the legal fees and this prompted Applicant to file the Bill of Costs which was eventually taxed at Kshs. 133,290/= and a Certificate of Taxation issued to that effect.
3. It is stated that the Respondent refused , failed and/or neglected to settle the taxed costs despite being served with the copy of the ruling and the Certificate of Taxation, the Respondent refused, failed and/or neglected to settle the taxed costs .
4. The Applicant further states that the Certificate of Taxation has not been appealed against , set aside or altered by the Respondent and therefore, it is only fair that the application be allowed as prayed.
Determination 5. This Court confirms from the material before it that indeed that Applicant herein acted for the 2nd Defendant (David Rono) in the suit stated suit as duly instructed by the Respondent herein vide letter dated 11th August 2021.
6. It is further established that the Respondent was duly served with the Bill of Costs dated 5th September, 2023 and also with the Taxation Notice dated 6th October, 2023. There being no response from the Respondent, the Taxing Officer proceeded to tax the said Bill of Costs at Kshs. 133,290/= vide her ruling delivered on 6th February, 2024. A Certificate of Taxation was duly issued on 3rd April 2024.
7. Section 51 (2) of the Advocates Act which provides that :-“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.”
8. There has been no dispute as to the retainer. There has been no reference to the ruling on taxation. The Certificate of Taxation herein has not been set aside or altered by this Court and therefore, the same is considered final as to the amount stated therein.
9. Further, though served with this Application, the Respondent did not file any response and therefore, this application remains unopposed.
10. Interest on the said sum is provided for under paragraph 7 of the Advocates (Remuneration) Order thus:-“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.”
11. In the circumstances, the application dated 10th April, 2024 is allowed as follows:-1. Judgment be and is hereby entered in favour of the Applicant as against the Respondent in the sum of Kshs. 133,290/=.2. The Applicant is awarded interest on the said sum at the rate of fourteen (14%) per cent per annum calculable after Thirty (30) days from the date the Respondent was served with the Bill of Costs until payment in full.3. Costs of the application are awarded to the Applicant.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT NAKURU THIS 6TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024. PATRICIA GICHOHIJUDGEIn the presence of:Mr. Kinyua for the ApplicantN/A for the RespondentRuto, Court Assistant