[2019] KEHC 8377 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant was entitled to judgment for the taxed costs as there was no opposition from the respondent and no dispute on the retainer. The certificate of costs issued by the taxing officer was final and enforceable as a decree of the court under Section 51(2) of the Advocates Act. The court...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2019] KEHC 8377 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Okongo Wandago & Company Advocates; Respondent: Invesco Assurance Company Limited
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Homa Bay
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Cause 10 of 2018
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Cause / Ruling on Application for Judgment on Taxed Costs
- Outcome
- application allowed
- Legal Topics
- Advocate Client Costs, Taxation of Costs, Certificate of Costs, Enforcement of 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
Okongo Wandago & Company Advocates
Applicant
Invesco Assurance Company Limited
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Cause / Ruling on Application for Judgment on Taxed Costs
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to judgment for the taxed costs as per the certificate of costs.
- 2 Whether the certificate of costs should be deemed a decree of the court under Section 51(2) of the Advocates Act.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant was entitled to judgment for the taxed costs as there was no opposition from the respondent and no dispute on the retainer. The certificate of costs issued by the taxing officer was final and enforceable as a decree of the court under Section 51(2) of the Advocates Act. The court granted the orders sought in the application, allowing the applicant to recover the certified sum from the respondent. The ruling was also made applicable to similar applications involving the same parties in related cases, subject to necessary alterations in the decretal amounts.
Court Disposition
application allowed
Orders
- Judgment is entered for the applicant against the respondent for Kshs.116,253 as per the certificate of costs dated 9th October 2018.
- The certificate of costs is deemed a decree of the court for the taxed sum due to the applicant against the respondent.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
27 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT HOMA BAY
MISCELLANEOUS CAUSE NO.10 OF 2018
IN THE MATTER OF THE ADVOCATES ACT
AND
IN THE MATTER OF THE ADVOCATES REMUNERATION (AMENDMENT) ORDER, 2014
AND
IN THE MATTER OF RECOVERY OF TAXED COSTS AS BETWEEN ADVOCATES AND CLIENTS
BETWEEN
OKONGO WANDAGO &COMPANY ADVOCATES....ADVOCATES/APPLICANT
VERSUS
INVESCO ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED................ CLIENT/RESPONDENT
ADVOCATES-CLIENT COSTS ARISING FROM CONTENTIOUS MATTERS IN OYUGIS SRMCC NO.51 OF 2016
RULING
[1]The application by Okongo Wandago & Co. Advocates, vide a Notice of Motion dated 17th October 2018, basically seeks orders that judgment be entered against the respondent, Invesco assurance Co. Limited, for the sum of Kshs.116, 253/= as stated in the certificate of costs dated 9th October 2018 and that the certificate be deemed to be a decree of this court for the taxed sum found due to the applicant against the respondent.
[2]The application is based on the grounds in the body of the notice of motion as fortified by the averments contained in a supporting affidavit deponed by Kennedy Okongoon 17th October 2018 The respondent was duly served with the application and the necessary hearing notice but failed to file a response nor attend the inter parties hearing of the application. It may therefore be safely inferred that the application is free from any objection and/or opposition from the respondent.
[3]The suit from which the certificate of costs issued was PMCC No.51 of 2016 at Oyugis. The relevant advocate/client bill of costs was filed before the Deputy Registrar of this court on 19th June 2018 and on the 20th June 2018, the necessary notice of taxation was issued to the parties.
The bill was eventually taxed on the 9th October 2018 in the sum of Kshs.116, 253/= and the certificate of costs was issued on 18th October 2018, on which date the applicant filed a notice of objection under Rule 11 (1) of the Advocates Remuneration (Amendment) Order, 2014 but seemed not to have pursued it.
[4]Under Section 51 (2) of the Advocates Act (Cap.16 Laws of Kenya), “the certificate of the taxing officer by whom any bill has been taxed shall, unless it is set aside or altered by the court, be final as to the amount of the costs covered thereby and the court may make such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit, including, in a case where the retainer is not disputed, an order that judgment be entered for the sum certified to be due with costs”.
[5]This court, having considered the application on the basis of the supporting grounds and the oral submissions by the applicant’s learned counsel, M/s Ojwang, and considering that the application remained unopposed by the respondent, is satisfied that there is merit in the application as there is no disputed whatever on the retainer.
Therefore, prayers 2, 3 and 4 of the notice of motion are hereby granted.
As similar applications involving the same parties arising from suits filed at the magistrate’s court in Oyugis being PMCC No.49 of 2016, NO.50 of 2016 and No.96 of 2014, were presented before this court on the same day in Misc. Civil Cases No.12, 13 and 39, this ruling shall apply to these other cases subject to necessary alterations in the decretal amounts.
Ordered accordingly.
J.R. KARANJAH
JUDGE
12. 03. 2019
[Read and signed this 12thday of March, 2019].