[2012] KEHC 3208 (KLR)
The court held that the certificate of costs issued to the applicant had not been challenged by a valid reference under rule 11 of the Advocate Remuneration Order. The respondent's objections were found to be broad and vague, lacking specificity and substance. The court found no abuse of process or unlawfulness in...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2012] KEHC 3208 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Otieno Ragot & Co. Advocates; Respondent: Joseph Ouma Atonga
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kisumu
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Application 275 of 2009
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Adopt Certificate of Costs as Judgment
- Outcome
- application allowed
- Judges
- HK Chemitei
- Legal Topics
- Advocate Remuneration, Certificate of Costs, Adoption of Costs as Judgment
- 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
Otieno Ragot & Co. Advocates
Applicant
Joseph Ouma Atonga
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Adopt Certificate of Costs as Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the certificate of costs issued should be adopted as the judgment and decree of the court.
- 2 Whether the respondent's objections are sufficient to bar the adoption of the certificate of costs.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that the certificate of costs issued to the applicant had not been challenged by a valid reference under rule 11 of the Advocate Remuneration Order. The respondent's objections were found to be broad and vague, lacking specificity and substance. The court found no abuse of process or unlawfulness in the applicant's conduct. Accordingly, the court allowed the application and adopted the certificate of costs as the judgment and decree of the court, with costs to the applicant.
Court Disposition
application allowed
Orders
- The certificate of costs dated 3-2-2011 and issued on 24-2-2011 for Kshs. 277,333.38 is adopted as the judgment and decree of the court.
- The applicant is awarded costs of the application.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
20 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA ATKISUMU
MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION 275 OF 2009
OTIENO RAGOT & CO. ADVOCATES……………………………………..…..APPLICANTS
VERSUS
JOSEPH OUMA ATONGA……………………………………………………..RESPONDENTS
R U L I N G
The applicant’s application dated 23-8-2011 prays that the certificate of costs dated 3-2-3011 and issued on 24-2-2011 for the sum of Kshs. 277,333. 38/= be adopted as the judgment and decree of this court.
This application has been made pursuant to the provisions of section 51 (2) of the Advocates Act Chapter 16 Laws of Kenya.
The affidavit of David Otieno sworn on 23-8-2011 shows that the applicant had been retained by the respondent to act on his behalf in case number Kisumu HCCC 86 of 2009. Later the respondent appointed M/S Ayayo & Co. Advocates to act on his behalf.
From the said affidavit the facts are crystal clear. The respondent has filed some grounds in objection dated 6-9-2011. The said grounds to say the least are too broad and vague. I do not see any abuse of the court process by the applicant. Neither do I see anything unlawful and unreasonable.
The option available for the respondent is to file a reference pursuant to rule 11 of the Advocate Remuneration Order.
I have not been shown any such reference. In any case the filing of such reference is not a bar for allowing the application. For the foregoing reasons, I shall allow the applicant’s application dated 23-8-2011 as prayed with costs.
Dated, signed and delivered at Kisumu this 13th day of July, 2012.
H.K. CHEMITEI
JUDGE
In the presence of:
………………………………….for the applicant
…………………………………for the respondent
HKC/va