[2004] KECA 103 (KLR)
The court found that the Deputy Registrar erred in disallowing item 2 of the Bill of Costs. Upon review of the submissions and the applicable rules, the court determined that item 2 should have been allowed at KES 2,500 and item 3 at KES 11,000. The reference was therefore allowed, and the contested items were...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2004] KECA 103 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Moses Ndung’u Wang’uru; Appellant: Wachira Gatamu; Respondent: William Wahome Ndirangu
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Court Station
- Court of Appeal at Nyeri
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- ? 19 of 1992
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Ruling on Reference From Taxation of Bill of Costs
- Outcome
- Reference allowed. Items 2 and 3 of the Bill of Costs allowed as claimed.
- Legal Topics
- Taxation of Costs, Bill of Costs, Appeal Procedure
- 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
Moses Ndung’u Wang’uru
Appellant
Wachira Gatamu
Appellant
William Wahome Ndirangu
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Reference From Taxation of Bill of Costs
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Deputy Registrar erred in disallowing item 2 of the Bill of Costs.
- 2 Whether items 2 and 3 of the Bill of Costs should be allowed as claimed by the appellants.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the Deputy Registrar erred in disallowing item 2 of the Bill of Costs. Upon review of the submissions and the applicable rules, the court determined that item 2 should have been allowed at KES 2,500 and item 3 at KES 11,000. The reference was therefore allowed, and the contested items were awarded as claimed by the appellants.
Court Disposition
Reference allowed. Items 2 and 3 of the Bill of Costs allowed as claimed.
Orders
- Item 2 of the Bill of Costs is allowed at KES 2,500.
- Item 3 of the Bill of Costs is allowed at KES 11,000.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
4 paragraphs
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NYERI (CORAM: O’KUBASU, J.A (IN CHAMBERS) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 19 OF 1992 BETWEEN 1. MOSES NDUNG’U WANG’URU 2. WACHIRA GATAMU ………………………….. APPELLANTS AND WILLIAM WAHOME NDIRANGU ……………..…………………. RESPONDENT (Appeal from the ruling and order of the High Court of Kenya at Nyeri (Tunoi, J) dated 8 th October, 1991) in H.C.C.C No. 148 of 1989 (O.S)) ******************* R U L I N G
Having considered the submissions by Mr. Ghadialy, and taking into account what the Rules of this Court provide, I am satisfied that the Deputy Registrar erred when he disallowed item 2 of the Bill of Costs. He should have allowed Shs. 2,500/= for item 2 and Shs. 11,000/= for item 3. Hence the reference is allowed and items 2 and 3 of the Bill of Costs, which are the only items that are contested, are allowed as stated above.
Dated and delivered at Nyeri this 27th day of October, 2004. E.O. O’KUBASU JUDGE OF APPEAL
I certify that this is a true copy of the original. DEPUTY REGISTRAR