[2024] KEELC 3841 (KLR)

[2024] KEELC 3841 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant failed to comply with the mandatory procedural requirements under paragraph 11(1) of the Advocates Remuneration Order by not filing a notice of objection or seeking written reasons from the taxing master before filing the reference. This omission rendered the chamber summons...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2024] KEELC 3841 (KLR)
Parties
Respondent: Murunga & Associates Advocates; Applicant: Hon. Justice Charles P. Chemutut
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Malindi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Miscellaneous Application 3 of 2020
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Chamber Summons Seeking Stay and Review of Taxation Decision
Outcome
application dismissed
Judges
FM Njoroge
Legal Topics
Taxation of Costs, Advocate Client Bill, Procedure for Reference, Jurisdiction of Court
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Taxation of Costs Advocate Client Bill Procedure for Reference Jurisdiction of Court

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

Parties

Murunga & Associates Advocates

Respondent

Hon. Justice Charles P. Chemutut

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Chamber Summons Seeking Stay and Review of Taxation Decision

  1. 1 Whether the chamber summons is incompetent for being filed contrary to paragraph 11 of the Advocates’ Remuneration Order.
  2. 2 Whether the taxing master committed any errors in her ruling delivered on 31st May 2023 and whether the same should be reviewed.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant failed to comply with the mandatory procedural requirements under paragraph 11(1) of the Advocates Remuneration Order by not filing a notice of objection or seeking written reasons from the taxing master before filing the reference. This omission rendered the chamber summons incompetent. The court upheld the respondent's preliminary objection and dismissed the application, holding that without compliance with the prescribed procedure, the court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the reference. Consequently, the substantive issues regarding the alleged error in the taxed amount were not considered.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The application dated 12th June 2023 is dismissed.
  • There shall be no orders as to costs.