[2004] KEHC 183 (KLR)

[2004] KEHC 183 (KLR)

The court found that there was no evidence of proper service of the notice of taxation on the respondent, as the affidavit of service did not have the signed notice annexed. In the absence of proof of service, the respondent was denied the opportunity to participate in the taxation proceedings. The court exercised...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2004] KEHC 183 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Peter Onyango Bonyo t/a Onyango Bonyo & Associates; Respondent: Pronto Communications Ltd
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Miscellaneous Application 820 of 2003
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Taxation
Outcome
Application allowed; taxation set aside; costs awarded to respondent.
Judges
MM Kasango
Legal Topics
Taxation of Costs, Service of Process, Setting Aside Orders
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Taxation of Costs Service of Process Setting Aside Orders

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 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Peter Onyango Bonyo t/a Onyango Bonyo & Associates

Applicant

Pronto Communications Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Taxation

  1. 1 Whether the respondent was properly served with the notice of taxation and bill of costs.
  2. 2 Whether the certificate of taxation dated 26th September 2003 should be set aside for lack of service.
  3. 3 Whether the respondent should be allowed to participate in the taxation proceedings.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that there was no evidence of proper service of the notice of taxation on the respondent, as the affidavit of service did not have the signed notice annexed. In the absence of proof of service, the respondent was denied the opportunity to participate in the taxation proceedings. The court exercised its discretion to set aside the taxation that took place on 26th September 2003 and awarded costs of the application to the respondent.

Court Disposition

Application allowed; taxation set aside; costs awarded to respondent.

Orders

  • The taxation which took place on 26th September 2003 is hereby set aside.
  • The costs of the application dated 15th July 2003 are awarded to the respondent to the bill.