[2023] KECPT 1048 (KLR)

[2023] KECPT 1048 (KLR)

The Tribunal found that the Bill of Costs as drawn was reasonable except for the claimed 50% increase, which was denied due to lack of demonstrated complexity or difficulty in the matter. The respondents' failure to file a response, despite being granted time and ordered to do so, meant the Tribunal proceeded to...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2023] KECPT 1048 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Julius Nzuki & another; Respondent: Mirriam Mumbua Mutuku; Respondent: Johnstone Maingi Kaleli
Court
Cooperative Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Tribunal Case 461 of 2019
Procedural Posture
Bill of Costs Application / Ruling on Taxation of Bill of Costs
Outcome
Bill of Costs taxed and allowed as drawn, save for the 50% increase which is denied.
Judges
BM Kimemia, J. Mwatsama, B Sawe, F Lotuiya, P. Gichuki, PO Aol
Legal Topics
Taxation of Costs, Bill of Costs Assessment, Costs Award, Procedure Noncompliance
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Taxation of Costs Bill of Costs Assessment Costs Award Procedure Noncompliance

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 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Julius Nzuki & another

Applicant

Mirriam Mumbua Mutuku

Respondent

Johnstone Maingi Kaleli

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Bill of Costs Application / Ruling on Taxation of Bill of Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Bill of Costs as drawn should be allowed in full or in part.
  2. 2 Whether the 50% increase claimed in the Bill of Costs is justified given the complexity or difficulty of the matter.
  3. 3 Whether the Respondent's failure to file a response affects the assessment of the Bill of Costs.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that the Bill of Costs as drawn was reasonable except for the claimed 50% increase, which was denied due to lack of demonstrated complexity or difficulty in the matter. The respondents' failure to file a response, despite being granted time and ordered to do so, meant the Tribunal proceeded to assess the Bill as presented. The Tribunal exercised its discretion to allow the main item as drawn but refused the enhancement, emphasizing that increases above the standard scale must be justified by the nature of the case.

Court Disposition

Bill of Costs taxed and allowed as drawn, save for the 50% increase which is denied.

Orders

  • Item 1 taxed at Kshs. 102,448.80 as drawn is allowed.
  • The 50% increase claimed is denied for lack of complexity or difficulty.