[2006] KEHC 254 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant was properly retained by the respondent and rendered legal services, after which the respondent failed to settle the advocate's fees. The bill of costs was taxed by consent and a certificate of taxation was issued, which has not been set aside or varied. There being no dispute as...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2006] KEHC 254 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Kulecho & Co. Advocates; Respondent: Invesco Assurance Co. Ltd
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- ? 353 of 2006
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Judgment on Taxed Costs
- Outcome
- application allowed; judgment entered for applicant
- Judges
- MM Kasango
- Legal Topics
- Advocate Remuneration, Taxation of Costs, Judgment on Certified 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
Kulecho & Co. Advocates
Applicant
Invesco Assurance Co. Ltd
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Judgment on Taxed Costs
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to judgment for the taxed costs as certified by the Deputy Registrar.
- 2 Whether the applicant is entitled to interest at 9% per annum on the taxed costs under the Advocates (Remuneration) Order.
- 3 Whether there is any dispute as to retainer or the amount taxed.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant was properly retained by the respondent and rendered legal services, after which the respondent failed to settle the advocate's fees. The bill of costs was taxed by consent and a certificate of taxation was issued, which has not been set aside or varied. There being no dispute as to retainer or the amount taxed, and no opposition to the application, the court held that the applicant is entitled to judgment for the taxed costs. Further, under paragraph 7 of the Advocates (Remuneration) Order, the applicant is entitled to interest at 9% per annum on the taxed costs. The court therefore entered judgment for the applicant in the sum of Kshs.28,000, awarded...
Court Disposition
application allowed; judgment entered for applicant
Orders
- Judgment is entered against the respondent in the sum of Kshs.28,000 being the taxed costs.
- The applicant is granted costs of the Notice of Motion dated 6th October, 2006.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
17 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT NAIROBI (MILIMANI COMMERCIAL COURTS)
Misc Cause 353 of 2006
KULECHO & CO. ADVOCATES ………………..…...…………APPLICANT
VERSUS
INVESCO ASSURANCE CO. LTD…………....……………RESPONDENT
RULING
The Applicant has moved this court by Notice of Motion dated 6th October, 2006. The Applicant seeks that judgement be entered against the Respondent for sum of Kshs.28,000/= being the taxed costs. The Applicant further seeks interest at the rate of 9% per annum as provided by paragraph 7 of the Advocates (Remuneration) Order. The Applicant has moved under Section 51 (2) of the Advocates Act. In the affidavit in support the Applicant who is the advocate with the bill stated that he is an advocate practicing under the name of Kulecho & company Advocates. By instructions of 9th December, 2005 the Respondent retained him as an advocate to defend RM.CC. No.9937 of 2005. The advocate proceeded to file an appearance and Defence and informed the Respondent of the development of the suit. Thereafter the Respondent failed or declined to furnish the Applicant with instructions on how to pursue the matter. Further on being presented with the fee note the Respondent failed to settle the Applicant’s fee. Having so failed the applicant filed his bill of costs which was taxed by the court on 18th July, 2006. As it can be seen from the Deputy Registrar’s certificate of taxation dated 28th September, 2006 the aforesaid bill of costs was taxed by consent between the parties. It will therefore seem that there is no dispute as to retainer in this matter. That certificate of taxation has not to date been set aside or varied. By paragraph 7 of the Advocates (Remuneration) Order an advocate is entitled to charge 9% interest per annum on his disbursements and costs. There being no opposition to the Applicant’s application the court will grant the following orders:-
(1) That judgement be and is hereby entered against the Respondent in the sum of Kshs.28,000/= being the taxed costs.
(2) That the Applicant is granted costs of the Notice of Motion dated 6th October, 2006.
(3) That the Applicant is awarded interest at the rate of 9% per annum on the taxed costs thereof.
MARY KASANGO
JUDGE
Dated and delivered this 27th day of November, 2006
MARY KASANGO
JUDGE