[2019] KEHC 6011 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant had established that two bills of costs were taxed and allowed in its favour, that the respondent had not paid the taxed costs, had not filed any reference or appeal, and had not challenged the retainer. The affidavit evidence was found credible, and in the absence of any challenge...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2019] KEHC 6011 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Lensinko Njoroge & Gathogo Advocates; Respondent: Invesco Assurance Co. Ltd
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Narok
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Application 31 of 2019
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Entry of Judgment Under Section 51(2) of the Advocates Act
- Outcome
- application allowed; judgment entered for applicant for taxed costs; no order as to costs
- Legal Topics
- Taxed Costs Enforcement, Advocate Client Bill of Costs, Summary Judgment, Retainer Issues
- 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
Lensinko Njoroge & Gathogo Advocates
Applicant
Invesco Assurance Co. Ltd
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Entry of Judgment Under Section 51(2) of the Advocates Act
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to entry of judgment for the taxed costs against the respondent under section 51(2) of the Advocates Act.
- 2 Whether the respondent has challenged the retainer or filed a reference or appeal against the taxed costs.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant had established that two bills of costs were taxed and allowed in its favour, that the respondent had not paid the taxed costs, had not filed any reference or appeal, and had not challenged the retainer. The affidavit evidence was found credible, and in the absence of any challenge by the respondent, the court held that the applicant was entitled to judgment for the taxed sum under section 51(2) of the Advocates Act. Accordingly, judgment was entered for the applicant for Kshs 260,267.70.
Court Disposition
application allowed; judgment entered for applicant for taxed costs; no order as to costs
Orders
- Judgment is entered in favour of the applicant for Kshs 260,267.70 against the respondent.
- A decree shall issue pursuant to the judgment.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
18 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAROK
MISC. APPLICATION NO. 31 OF 2019
LENSINKO NJOROGE & GATHOGO ADVOCATES.....ADVOCATE/APPLICANT
VERSUS
INVSECO ASSURANCE CO. LTD..........................................CLIENT/RESPONDENT
RULING
1. Pursuant to the provisions of sections 51 (2) of the Advocates Act (Cap 16) Laws of Kenya and all other enabling provisions of the law, the applicant seeks an order for entry of judgement in its favour against Invesco Assurance Co Ltd for the sum of Kshs. 260,267. 70. Additionally, it seeks an order for the issuance of a decree pursuant to the foregoing judgement.
2. The application is supported by six grounds that are set out on the face of the notice of motion. The major grounds are as follows. The applicant lodged two bills of costs, which were allowed against the client in the sum of Kshs 260, 267. 70. The client has not paid the taxed costs. The client has not filed any reference. Additionally, the client has not filed any appeal against the taxed costs. The issue of retainer has not been challenged. Finally, the applicant has for those reasons prayed for summary judgement against the client.
3. Furthermore, in addition to the foregoing grounds the applicant through Wilson Gathogo has deponed to a nine paragraphs supporting affidavit in support of the application. In that affidavit the applicant has replicated the grounds that are set out on the face of the notice of motion, except that the applicant has annexed the two certificates of the taxed costs as annexes marked “WG1” and “WG 2. ”
4. I find the affidavit evidence to be credible. As a result, I hereby enter judgement in favour of the applicant in the sum of Kshs 260,267. 70.
5. There will be no order as to costs.
6. The upshot of the foregoing, is that the application is allowed as prayed for in prayer numbers 1, 2 and 3 of the notice of motion dated6th June 2019.
Ruling signed, dated and delivered at Narok in open court on this 4th day of July 2019
in the presence of Mr. Chege holding brief for Mr. Gathogo for the applicant and in the absence of the respondent.
J. M. Bwonwonga
Judge
4/7/2019