Republic v Nyeri County Government Exparte Central Kenya Coffeee Mill Ltd [2017] KEELC 1993 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's High Court confirmed that opposed matters attract higher instruction fees, and filing written submissions counts as 'going into battle' for getting-up fees.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the taxing master fell into error of principle in taxing instruction fees at Kshs. 45,000 on the lower scale
Yes; the matter was opposed and the award should have been on the higher scale; the court substituted Kshs. 150,000
The court considered consistency in taxation and trends in awards in judicial review matters, noting that comparable cases upheld awards far above the assessed figure. Though the matter was straightforward, the fact that it was defended required the upper scale. The taxing master gave no reasons for adopting the lower scale, amounting to an error of principle.
Whether getting-up fees were payable where the matter was disposed of by written submissions
Yes; the applicant was entitled to getting-up fees, assessed at Kshs. 50,000 being one third of instruction fees
Relying on Kuloba's definition of 'getting up' and Ojwang J's exposition, the court held that filing written submissions satisfies the concept of 'going into battle'. The Mayers v Akira Ranch principle that getting-up may be less without an appearance does not defeat the entitlement where pleadings and submissions were prepared and filed.
Whether the awards on court attendance and photocopying items should be interfered with
No; the applicant failed to prove half-day attendances or produce receipts for photocopying
Taxation rests largely on evidence; the party seeking higher-scale costs must prove entitlement. No evidence tied photocopying costs to particular documents or receipts, and no evidence supported half-day attendance claims, so the taxing master's awards stood.
Legal principles established
#- Where a matter is opposed, instruction fees for judicial review applications should be assessed on the higher scale under schedule 6A(ii) of the Advocates (Remuneration) Order
- Getting-up fees are payable where a matter is disposed of by written submissions; 'going into battle' need not involve oral hearing
- An advocate need not prove personal court attendance to be entitled to court attendance fees
Court orders
#- 1.Set aside the taxing master's award on item 1 (instruction fees) and substitute Kshs. 150,000 based on the higher scale
- 2.Award getting-up fees (item 2) of Kshs. 50,000, being one third of the assessed instruction fees
- 3.Allow item 8 (drawing replying affidavit) at Kshs. 2,300 as claimed
- 4.Allow item 25 (court attendance) at Kshs. 500 as pleaded
- 5.Set aside the impugned items and substitute the awards assessed by the court
- 6.Dismiss the reference to the extent of items 26, 27, 28, 29, 31, 32, 36 and 39
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Rule 11(2) of the Advocates (Remuneration) Order
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Republic v Nyeri County Government Exparte Central Kenya Coffeee Mill Ltd [2017] KEELC 1993 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2017). Chamber Summons dated 16th May 2016 (Reference under Rule 11(2), Advocates (Remuneration) Order). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2017/1993/eng@2017-06-15
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.