[2003] KEHC 517 (KLR)
The court held that taxation of the advocate/client bill of costs before the hearing of the main suit is proper and advantageous to the defendants, as it will clarify the amounts legally due and will not prejudice the defence. The issue of liability for payment between the defendants is separate and can be...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2003] KEHC 517 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Sifuna & Co. Advocates; Defendant: Akhtar Shahid Butt; Defendant: Modern Coast Builders & Contractors
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Mombasa
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- ? 355 of 2002
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Case / Ruling on Chamber Summons for Directions Regarding Taxation of Bill of Costs
- Outcome
- Application for directions granted; advocate/client bill of costs to be taxed before hearing of main suit.
- Legal Topics
- Taxation of Costs, Advocate Client Bills, Procedure for Costs, Liability for 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
Sifuna & Co. Advocates
Plaintiff
Akhtar Shahid Butt
Defendant
Modern Coast Builders & Contractors
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Case / Ruling on Chamber Summons for Directions Regarding Taxation of Bill of Costs
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the plaintiff's advocate/client bill of costs should be taxed before the hearing of the main suit.
- 2 Whether taxation of the bill of costs at this stage would prejudice the defence.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that taxation of the advocate/client bill of costs before the hearing of the main suit is proper and advantageous to the defendants, as it will clarify the amounts legally due and will not prejudice the defence. The issue of liability for payment between the defendants is separate and can be determined after taxation. The court found no reason to delay taxation, as it is an independent process and the certificate issued by the taxing officer will be applied in the current suit.
Court Disposition
Application for directions granted; advocate/client bill of costs to be taxed before hearing of main suit.
Orders
- The plaintiff's advocate/client bill of costs shall be taxed by the taxing officer before the hearing of the main suit.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
13 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
CIVIL CASE NO. 355 OF 2002
SIFUNA & CO. ADVOCATES ……..………………….…….. PLAINTIFF
- VERSUS -
AKHTAR SHAHID BUTT
MODERN COAST BUILDERS & CONTRACTORS …….. DEFENDANT
R U L I N G
The plaintiff, an Advocate filed suit for recovery of his client/Advocate’s costs as against the defendants. He now seeks directions through Chamber Summons brought under Order 49 (d) of the Advocates Act which provides as follows: “49 (d) at any time after the bill of costs has bee n filed, and before the suit has been set down for hearing, any party to the action may take out Summons for directions as to whether such bill should be taxed by the taxing officer before the suit is heard”. Counsel for the Defence Mr. Okong’o opposed the issuance of the said Direction on the ground that there was a dispute as to whether the 2nd Defendant was liable to pay the amounts due and therefore the issue of liability ought to be determined first.
I have read through the pleadings and it is no doubt that the 2nd Defendant is a director in the 1st Defendant Company. As to whether the 2nd Defendant can be held liable for debts owing by the 1st Defendant is an issue that cannot be determined at this stage. However the issue as to whether the Bill of costs should be taxed before the suit is determined is one that must be answered. The suit pending and it’s origin is the non-payment of the Advocates’ costs. Section 48 and 49 of the Advocates Act are clear as to the procedure to be followed. The taxation in my view is to the Advantage of the defendants as they will have no doubt on their minds what kind of amounts are indeed legally due to the plaintiff, if any, at the time they will get down to dealing with the issue of whom among them is liable to pay the same. It has not been shown that the taxation of the Bill of costs at this stage will prejudice the Defence case. It is after all an Independent Cause all together and only the certificate issued by the Taxing officer will be applied in the current suit. In the circumstances, I do grant the direction that the plaintiffs Advocates/Client bill of costs be taxed by the taxing officer before the hearing of the main suit.
Dated and Delivered at Mombasa this 14th day of February, 2003.
P.M. TUTUI
COMMISSIONER OF ASSIZE