[2024] KEHC 7286 (KLR)
Where a certificate of taxation has been issued and there is no dispute as to the retainer, and the certificate has not been set aside or altered, the court is empowered under Section 51(2) of the Advocates Act to enter judgment for the amount certified. In this case, the respondents did not oppose the application...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2024] KEHC 7286 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Munyithya Mutugi Umara & Muzna Co. Advocates; Respondent: Daniel Munyao Muange; Respondent: Elizabeth Mwende Munyao; Respondent: Single Palm Resort Limited
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Mombasa
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Application 381 of 2019
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Unopposed Application for Judgment on Taxed Costs
- Outcome
- Application allowed. Judgment entered for the applicant against the respondents in terms of the certificate of costs dated 30th March 2022, with interest at 9% from 30/4/2022.
- Judges
- DKN Magare
- Legal Topics
- Advocate Client Costs, Taxation of Costs, Certificate of Taxation, Judgment Entry on 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
Munyithya Mutugi Umara & Muzna Co. Advocates
Applicant
Daniel Munyao Muange
Respondent
Elizabeth Mwende Munyao
Respondent
Single Palm Resort Limited
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Unopposed Application for Judgment on Taxed Costs
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether judgment should be entered for the applicant against the respondents for the sum taxed and certified by the Deputy Registrar.
- 2 Whether interest should be awarded on the taxed sum from the date specified.
Ratio Decidendi
Where a certificate of taxation has been issued and there is no dispute as to the retainer, and the certificate has not been set aside or altered, the court is empowered under Section 51(2) of the Advocates Act to enter judgment for the amount certified. In this case, the respondents did not oppose the application or challenge the certificate of taxation. The court found the application merited and entered judgment for the applicant in the sum certified, with interest awarded at 9% from the specified date.
Court Disposition
Application allowed. Judgment entered for the applicant against the respondents in terms of the certificate of costs dated 30th March 2022, with interest at 9% from 30/4/2022.
Orders
- Judgment is entered for the applicant against the respondents in terms of the certificate of costs dated 30th March 2022.
- Interest on the sum is awarded at 9% effective 30/4/2022.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
26 paragraphs
Munyithya Mutugi Umara & Muzna Co. Advocates v Muange & 2 others (Miscellaneous Application 381 of 2019) [2024] KEHC 7286 (KLR) (3 June 2024) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2024] KEHC 7286 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Mombasa
Miscellaneous Application 381 of 2019
DKN Magare, J
June 3, 2024
Between
Munyithya Mutugi Umara & Muzna Co. Advocates
Applicant
and
Daniel Munyao Muange
1st Respondent
Elizabeth Mwende Munyao
2nd Respondent
Single Palm Resort Limited
3rd Respondent
Ruling
1. This is a Ruling over a Miscellaneous Application dated 11/4/2023 where the Applicant sought that Judgement be entered for the Applicant against the Respondent in the sum of Kshs 1,960,480/= being the sum taxed and certified by the Deputy Registrar on 30th March 2022 as due to the Applicant with interest thereon.
2. The Application arose from the Advocate/Client Bill of Costs dated 25th September 2019 which was taxed at Kshs 1,960,480/=.
3. The Application is expressed to be brought under Section 51 (1) of the Advocates Act. The said Section 51(2) of the Advocates Act provides thus:Pursuant to the provisions of Section 2 of the Advocates Act -“‘Client’ includes any person who, as a principal or on behalf of another, or as a trustee or personal representative, or in any other capacity, has power, express or implied, to retain or employ an advocate and any person who is or may be liable to pay an advocate any costs.”
4. As a fact after filing of the Notice of Motion dated 11/4/2023, there does not appear to be active participation of the Respondent. The Application is unopposed.
5. In the case of Musyoka & Wambua Advocates v Rustam Hira Advocate (2006) eKLR it was held: -“Section 51 of the Act makes general provisions as to taxation, as the marginal note indicates. One of those provisions is that the court has discretion to enter judgment on a Certificate of Taxation which has not been set aside or altered, where there is no dispute as to retainer. This in my view is a mode of recovery of taxed costs provided by law, in addition to filing of suit…
6. I find and hold that the Application is merited and allow it as prayed.
Determination 7. I therefore make the following orders: -a.Judgment be and is hereby entered for the Applicant against the Respondent in terms of the Certificate of Costs dated 30th March 2022. b.Interest thereon is awarded at 9% effective 30/4/2022.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED VIRTUALLY AT NYERI ON THIS 3RD DAY OF JUNE, 2024. KIZITO MAGAREJUDGEIn the presence of:-Munithya, Mutugi, Umara & Muzna Co. AdvocatesStephen Jumbale & Co. AdvocatesCourt Assistant – Jedidah