[2019] KEHC 1565 (KLR)

[2019] KEHC 1565 (KLR)

The court found that the taxing officer erred by striking out the Bill of Costs on the mistaken belief that the applicant was not entitled to costs, when in fact the Court of Appeal had expressly awarded costs to the applicant in both the High Court and the Court of Appeal. This constituted an error on the face of...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2019] KEHC 1565 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Taj Mall Limited; Respondent: Taj Villas Management Limited
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Appeal 607 of 2011
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Reference Against Taxing Officer's Decision
Outcome
Application allowed. Bill of Costs remitted for taxation. No order as to costs.
Judges
CW Githua
Legal Topics
Taxation of Costs, Reference Against Taxing Officer, Error on Face of Record
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Taxation of Costs Reference Against Taxing Officer Error on Face of Record

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Taj Mall Limited

Appellant

Taj Villas Management Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Ruling on Reference Against Taxing Officer's Decision

  1. 1 Whether the taxing officer erred in striking out the Bill of Costs based on a misapprehension of the Court of Appeal's orders.
  2. 2 Whether the Bill of Costs should be remitted for fresh taxation in light of the Court of Appeal's decision.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the taxing officer erred by striking out the Bill of Costs on the mistaken belief that the applicant was not entitled to costs, when in fact the Court of Appeal had expressly awarded costs to the applicant in both the High Court and the Court of Appeal. This constituted an error on the face of the record. The court held that the proper course was to set aside the taxing officer's ruling and remit the Bill of Costs for fresh taxation in accordance with the orders of the Court of Appeal. The court made no order as to costs for the present application.

Court Disposition

Application allowed. Bill of Costs remitted for taxation. No order as to costs.

Orders

  • The Chamber Summons dated 8th February 2019 is allowed.
  • The Bill of Costs dated 14th February 2018 and filed on 15th February 2018 is remitted to the taxing officer for taxation.