[2025] KEHC 8824 (KLR)

[2025] KEHC 8824 (KLR)

The court held that the application was fatally defective because it failed to disclose the matter in which judgment for taxed costs was sought, and was filed in a new file rather than the file where the costs were taxed. The law requires that such applications be made in the same matter to ensure procedural...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2025] KEHC 8824 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Geoffrey Muriungi Kiugu t/a Kiugu & Company Advocates; Respondent: The County Government of Kiambu
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Judicial Review Application E167 of 2025
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Application / Ruling on Application to Enter Judgment on Certificate of Taxation
Outcome
Application struck out as incompetent.
Judges
RE Aburili
Legal Topics
Advocate Client Costs, Certificate of Taxation, Entry of Judgment, Procedural Incompetence
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Advocate Client Costs Certificate of Taxation Entry of Judgment Procedural Incompetence

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Geoffrey Muriungi Kiugu t/a Kiugu & Company Advocates

Applicant

The County Government of Kiambu

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review Application / Ruling on Application to Enter Judgment on Certificate of Taxation

  1. 1 Whether the court can enter judgment for taxed costs in a matter not disclosed in the application.
  2. 2 Whether an application for entry of judgment on a certificate of taxation must be filed in the same matter where costs were taxed.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the application was fatally defective because it failed to disclose the matter in which judgment for taxed costs was sought, and was filed in a new file rather than the file where the costs were taxed. The law requires that such applications be made in the same matter to ensure procedural continuity. As a result, the application was found to be incompetent and was struck out, with the applicant directed to file the application in the correct file (JR. Misc E127/2022).

Court Disposition

Application struck out as incompetent.

Orders

  • The application dated 19/6/2025 is struck out with no orders as to costs.
  • The applicant to file the application in JR. Misc E127/2022.