[2004] KEHC 2093 (KLR)

[2004] KEHC 2093 (KLR)

The court held that while the Taxing Officer has discretion to increase or decrease the instruction fee under Schedule 6(1) of the Advocates (Remuneration) Order, this discretion must be exercised judicially. The court found that the reason given for reducing the instruction fee—namely, that the suit was finalized...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2004] KEHC 2093 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Salt Manufacturers (K) Ltd; Defendant: Pan African Credit & Finance Ltd; Defendant: G.N. Mburu t/a Haki Traders; Defendant: Hamilton, Harrison & Mathews
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Mombasa
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
? 569 of ??
Procedural Posture
Civil Case / Ruling on Taxation of Costs
Outcome
Application allowed; decision of Taxing Officer set aside.
Legal Topics
Taxation of Costs, Instruction Fee, Judicial Discretion, Remuneration Order
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Taxation of Costs Instruction Fee Judicial Discretion Remuneration Order

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Salt Manufacturers (K) Ltd

Plaintiff

Pan African Credit & Finance Ltd

Defendant

G.N. Mburu t/a Haki Traders

Defendant

Hamilton, Harrison & Mathews

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Case / Ruling on Taxation of Costs

  1. 1 Whether the Taxing Officer had discretion to reduce the instruction fee below the scale fee.
  2. 2 Whether the discretion to reduce the instruction fee was exercised judicially in this case.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that while the Taxing Officer has discretion to increase or decrease the instruction fee under Schedule 6(1) of the Advocates (Remuneration) Order, this discretion must be exercised judicially. The court found that the reason given for reducing the instruction fee—namely, that the suit was finalized at an early stage and the work involved was minimal—was not a sufficient or proper basis for exercising such discretion. The court emphasized that the details of instruction and value of the subject matter were clearly set out, and the instruction fee was correctly assessed at the scale amount. Therefore, the reduction of the fee by Kshs.500,000 was not justified, and the...

Court Disposition

Application allowed; decision of Taxing Officer set aside.

Orders

  • The decision to reduce the scale fee by Kshs.500,000 is set aside.
  • The instruction fee shall remain as Kshs.2,000,000.