[2023] KEELC 616 (KLR)
The court found that the application was unopposed, the certificate of costs had not been reviewed or altered, and the retainer was not disputed. Therefore, under section 51(2) of the Advocates Act, the certificate of costs is final as to the amount, and the court is empowered to enter judgment for the sum...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2023] KEELC 616 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: SM Onyango Associates Advocate; Respondent: Francis Ochieng Juma
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Kisumu
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Civil Application E024 of 2021
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Convert Certificate of Costs Into Judgment
- Outcome
- Application allowed. Judgment entered for the applicant for the certified costs, with interest at court rates and costs of the application.
- Judges
- E Asati
- Legal Topics
- Taxation of Costs, Certificate of Costs, Conversion to 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
SM Onyango Associates Advocate
Applicant
Francis Ochieng Juma
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Convert Certificate of Costs Into Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the certificate of costs should be converted into a judgment in favour of the applicant.
- 2 Whether interest should accrue on the taxed costs at court rates until payment in full.
- 3 Whether the applicant is entitled to costs of the application.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the application was unopposed, the certificate of costs had not been reviewed or altered, and the retainer was not disputed. Therefore, under section 51(2) of the Advocates Act, the certificate of costs is final as to the amount, and the court is empowered to enter judgment for the sum certified. The court allowed the application, entered judgment for the applicant for the amount in the certificate of costs, with interest at court rates and costs of the application.
Court Disposition
Application allowed. Judgment entered for the applicant for the certified costs, with interest at court rates and costs of the application.
Orders
- Judgment is entered in favour of the applicant for Kshs. 140,164 as per the certificate of costs dated March 30, 2022.
- Interest to accrue on the taxed costs at court rates until payment in full.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
21 paragraphs
SM Onyango Associates Advocate v Juma (Miscellaneous Civil Application E024 of 2021) [2023] KEELC 616 (KLR) (19 January 2023) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2023] KEELC 616 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Environment and Land Court at Kisumu
Miscellaneous Civil Application E024 of 2021
E Asati, J
January 19, 2023
Between
SM Onyango Associates Advocate
Applicant
and
Francis Ochieng Juma
Respondent
Ruling
1. This ruling is in respect of the notice of motion application dated April 1, 2022. It is an application brought pursuant to the provisions of section 51(2) of the Advocates Act cap 16 Laws of Kenya. The application seeks for orders that:a.That this honourable court be pleased to convert the Certificate of Costs in the sum of Kshs.140,164/= only (Kenya shillings one hundred and forty thousand, one hundred and sixty-four only) taxed on 24th March 2022 into judgement.b.That upon grant of prayer 1 above, interest do accrue on the taxed costs at 16% till payment in full.c.That the costs of this application be awarded to the applicant.
2. The application is based on the grounds that the applicant’s taxed costs remain unpaid to date, that the Certificate of Costs is yet to be set aside/reviewed and/or varied and that the application is made in good faith and in the interest of justice and in order to avoid a multiplicity of actions.
3. The application is supported by the averments in the supporting affidavit sworn by Stephanie Akinyi Advocate on April 1, 2022. Counsel deposed that since the costs were taxed the applicant gave the respondent the opportunity to pay the costs but that the respondent failed to seize the opportunity. A copy of the Certificate of Costs dated 30/3/2022 was annexed to th supporting affidavit and marked annexture SMO1.
4. The application proceeded ex parte because the respondent who was duly served did not respond to it or attend court for the hearing.
5. Section 51(2) pursuant to which the application was brought provides that“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 judgement be entered for the sum certified to be due with costs.”
6. I have read the notice of motion supporting affidavit and annextures thereto. I have also read the court record generally and in particular, the ruling of the taxing Officer herein dated March 24, 2022 and the resultant certificate of costs. There being no opposition to the application, the certificate of costs having not been reviewed or altered and given that the retainer is not disputed, I find that the application is merited. I allow the application and hereby enter judgement in favour of the applicant on the basis of the certificate of costs dated March 30, 2022 for Kshs.140, 164/- interest thereon at court rates and costs of the application.Orders accordingly.
RULING DATED AND SIGNED AT KISUMU, DELIVERED VIRTUALLY THIS 19TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2023 THROUGH MICROSOFT TEAMS VIDEO CONFERENCING PLATFORM.E. ASATIJUDGE.In the presence of:Maureen: Court Assistant.No appearance for the Applicant/AdvocateNo appearance for the Respondent/ClientE. ASATIJUDGE.