[2015] KEHC 1518 (KLR)
The court held that since the retainer was not disputed and there was no reference challenging the taxing officer's decision, the certificate of costs was final as to the amount. The grounds of opposition raised by the respondent were found to be hollow and did not constitute a valid challenge to the application....
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2015] KEHC 1518 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Otieno, Ragot & Co. Advocates; Respondent: Kenindia Assurance Company Limited
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kisumu
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Civil Application 209 of 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Adopt Certificate of Costs as Judgment
- Outcome
- application allowed; certificate of costs adopted as judgment and decree with interest and costs to applicant
- Judges
- EM Muchoki
- Legal Topics
- Advocate Client Costs, Taxation of Costs, Certificate of Costs, Interest on 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
Otieno, Ragot & Co. Advocates
Applicant
Kenindia Assurance Company Limited
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Adopt Certificate of Costs as Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the certificate of costs should be adopted as a judgment and decree of the court.
- 2 Whether interest at 14% per annum should be awarded from the date of the certificate of costs until payment in full.
- 3 Whether the costs of the application should be borne by the respondent/client.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that since the retainer was not disputed and there was no reference challenging the taxing officer's decision, the certificate of costs was final as to the amount. The grounds of opposition raised by the respondent were found to be hollow and did not constitute a valid challenge to the application. Accordingly, the court adopted the certificate of costs as a judgment and decree of the court, awarding the applicant the certified sum with interest at 14% per annum from 30 days after the date of the certificate of costs until payment in full. The costs of the application were also awarded to the applicant.
Court Disposition
application allowed; certificate of costs adopted as judgment and decree with interest and costs to applicant
Orders
- Judgment entered in terms of the Certificate of Costs for Kshs.368,032.19 with interest at 14% per annum from 28th May 2014 until payment in full.
- The costs of this application to be borne by the Client/Respondent.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
33 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT KISUMU
MISC. CIVIL CAUSE NO. 209 OF 2013
IN THE MATTER OF AN ADVOCATE – CLIENT BILL OF COSTS
BETWEEN
OTIENO, RAGOT & CO. ADVOCATES ….................APPLICANT/ADVOCATE
AND
KENINDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED …....... RESPONDENT/CLIENT
Arising from
Kericho HCCA No. 22 of 2010
PAUL OTIENO OMONDI …................................................................ PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
EVERLINE AOKO NDOLO …...................…................................... DEFENDANT
RULING
Before me is the Advocate/Applicant's Notice of Motion dated 7th May 2014 seeking orders:-
1. That the certificate of costs dated 8. 4.2014 in respect of the taxation order made on 8. 4.2014 for the sum of Kshs.368,032. 19/= (Kenya Shillings Three Hundred and Sixty Eight Thousand, and Thirty Two and Nineteen Cents) be adopted as Judgment and decree of this Honourable Court, together with interest thereon at 14% per annum from 8. 4.2014 until payment in full.
2. That the cost of this application be borne by the Respondent/Client.
The Respondent/Client filed Grounds of Opposition dated 28th October 2014 to the effect that:-
1. THAT the application is bad in law, frivolous, vexatious and constitutes an abuse of the Court process.
2. THAT the application is misplaced, incompetent, and goes against the mandatory provisions of the law.
3. THAT the application lacks in merit and ought to be dismissed at the first instance with costs to the respondent having fallen short of the requirements of the Advocates Act.
When parties appeared before me on 27th May 2014 they agreed to canvass the application by way of written submissions but despite reminders those of the Client/Respondent were never received. I have however fully considered those of the Advocate/Applicant as well as the grounds of opposition.
Section 51(2) of the Advocates Act provides as follows:-
''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.''
In the instant case the retainer is not disputed and there is no reference in regard to the decision of the taxing officer. The grounds of opposition filed are, with due respect hollow and do not afford any opposition to this application.
Accordingly judgment is entered in terms of the Certificate of Costs – a sum of Kshs.368,032/19 with interest at 14% per annum from 28th May 2014 (30 days from the date of the Certificate of Costs) until payment in full. The costs of this application be borne by the Client/Respondent. It is so ordered.
Signed, dated and pronounced at Kisumu this 14th day of October, 2015
E. N. MAINA
JUDGE
In presence of:
Miss Alinaitwe for the Applicant
Mr. Onsongo for Aron for the Respondent
CC: Felix Magutu