[2000] KEHC 389 (KLR)

[2000] KEHC 389 (KLR)

The court found that the defendant advocates received Ksh.950,526 from the insurance company on behalf of the plaintiff, of which certain sums were properly deducted for taxed costs and amounts owed to previous advocates. However, the defendant's accounts were unclear, and there was evidence of double accounting...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2000] KEHC 389 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Moses Kipkolum Kogo; Defendant: Nyamogo & Nyamogo Advocates
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Case 1036 of 2000
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Judgment
Outcome
judgment_for_plaintiff
Legal Topics
Advocate Client Accounts, Taxation of Costs, Remuneration of Advocates, Release of Decretal Sum
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Advocate Client Accounts Taxation of Costs Remuneration of Advocates Release of Decretal Sum

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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Moses Kipkolum Kogo

Plaintiff

Nyamogo & Nyamogo Advocates

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the defendant advocates are liable to deliver a proper account of monies received on behalf of the plaintiff and pay the balance due to the plaintiff.
  2. 2 Whether the sums retained by the defendant as costs and for previous advocates are justified and properly accounted for.
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to interest on the sums withheld by the defendant.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the defendant advocates received Ksh.950,526 from the insurance company on behalf of the plaintiff, of which certain sums were properly deducted for taxed costs and amounts owed to previous advocates. However, the defendant's accounts were unclear, and there was evidence of double accounting regarding the appeal costs. The court computed the correct amounts due, confirming that the plaintiff had not been fully paid the balance after all legitimate deductions. The court held that the plaintiff was entitled to judgment for the sum due, with interest at 12% from the date of filing the suit. The defendant was ordered to pay the outstanding balance to the plaintiff, and...

Court Disposition

judgment_for_plaintiff

Orders

  • Judgment entered for the plaintiff as prayed.
  • Defendant to pay the outstanding balance due to the plaintiff.