https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kemc/2026/606

https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kemc/2026/606

The court treated the two bills as similar arising from similar proceedings, allowed drawn items that were properly scaled, taxed service items at the prescribed rate due to missing particulars, taxed non-hearing attendances at the prescribed rate, allowed court fees supported by receipts, and disallowed future...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2026] KEMC 606 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiffs: ERICK FITONJE MWEYU & ANOTHER; Defendant: ANDREW OMONDI OWINO
Court
Magistrate's Court
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Case E213 of 2025
Procedural Posture
Civil Case; Taxation/assessment of Party and Party Bills of Costs / Ruling on Plaintiffs’ Party and Party Bills of Costs Dated 24 April 2026
Outcome
Bills of costs allowed in part; each bill assessed at Kshs. 85,300/=
Judges
["TO Omono"]
Legal Topics
Taxation of Party and Party Costs, Assessment of Disbursements and Attendances, Service Fees, Court Fees, Items Disallowed as Premature/unincurred
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Advocates Remuneration Costs Taxation of Party and Party Costs Assessment of Disbursements and Attendances Service Fees Court Fees Items Disallowed as Premature/unincurred

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 4 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 1 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

ERICK FITONJE MWEYU & ANOTHER

Plaintiffs

ANDREW OMONDI OWINO

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Case; Taxation/assessment of Party and Party Bills of Costs / Ruling on Plaintiffs’ Party and Party Bills of Costs Dated 24 April 2026

  1. 1 What amount should be allowed on the Plaintiffs’ party and party bills of costs in two similar matters
  2. 2 Whether service items were properly charged without particulars of place of service
  3. 3 Whether attendance items were chargeable where no hearing took place

Ratio Decidendi

The court treated the two bills as similar arising from similar proceedings, allowed drawn items that were properly scaled, taxed service items at the prescribed rate due to missing particulars, taxed non-hearing attendances at the prescribed rate, allowed court fees supported by receipts, and disallowed future unincurred items, resulting in each bill being assessed at Kshs. 85,300/=.

Court Disposition

Bills of costs allowed in part; each bill assessed at Kshs. 85,300/=

Orders

  • Items 1–2, 4–6(a),(b),(d) and (f), and item 8 allowed as drawn.
  • Items 3 in both bills taxed at Kshs. 1,400/= each.