Rogan-Kamper v Lord Grosvenor (No 3) [1977] KECA 6 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Court of Appeal confirmed judges can cut legal fees on a taxed bill only when they are clearly excessive, then reduced two fees by a third.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Standard of interference with a taxing officer's allowance on a rule 109(2) reference
The judge interferes only where the figure allowed is manifestly excessive or inadequate, taking comparators and inflation into account.
Rule 109(2) confines references to cases where a taxed bill is manifestly excessive or inadequate. Adopting Buckley LJ in Ogilvie v Massey, the judge is less competent than the taxing master on quantum and will intervene only where the taxing master is shown to have gone wholly wrong. Comparing fees allowed in Standard Bank, Block and Premchand Raichand, and allowing for inflation, the taxed fees here were almost double recent comparable allowances and therefore unreasonably large.
Whether a quantum-only reference is entertainable under rule 109
Yes; rule 109(2) expressly permits a reference on the ground that a taxed bill is manifestly excessive or inadequate, so the reference was properly before the judge.
The applicant invoked rule 109(2), which allows any person contending that a bill as taxed is manifestly excessive or inadequate to require reference to a judge, with power to deduct or add to render the bill reasonable. The appellant's submission that a quantum-only reference should not be entertained was rejected by entertaining and allowing the reference.
Legal principles established
#- A judge on a reference under rule 109(2) will not substitute his own figure unless the sum allowed by the taxing officer is outside reasonable limits, i.e. manifestly excessive or inadequate.
- In questions of quantum the court will not interfere with the taxing master unless it is shown he went wholly wrong.
Court orders
#- 1.Reduction of the instructions fee from Shs 12,000 to Shs 8,000
- 2.Reduction of the senior counsel brief fee from Shs 14,000 to Shs 10,000
- 3.The bill of costs to be altered accordingly
- 4.Costs of the reference assessed and awarded to the applicant at Shs 290 plus Shs 20 disbursements
- On appeal from
- Taxing Officer of the Court of Appeal
- Not stated in judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Rule 109(2) of the Court of Appeal Rules (reference against a taxed bill of costs)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Rogan-Kamper v Lord Grosvenor (No 3) [1977] KECA 6 (KLR)", Case Analysis (1977). Not stated in judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/1977/6/eng@1977-12-13
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.