Kemboy Law Advocates v Raana Sheldon & 2 others (Suing as Legal Representatives of the Estate of Doctor Yusuf Ali Eraj) [2020] KEELC 98 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court ruled that a lawyer's fee must reflect the full value of the dispute, not just one document, and sent the bill back for fresh taxation.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Basis for assessing instruction fees where there is no judgment or settlement
Where there is no judgment or settlement, the taxing officer must ascertain the instruction fee from the pleadings on the record, including all relevant factors such as the subdivision and sale of the suit property and failed settlement negotiations
The underlying suit in ELC 546 of 2011 was pending hearing, so there was no judgment or settlement fixing the value of the subject matter. The taxing officer based the instruction fee solely on the 2002/2001 agreement for sale of Kshs. 58,300,000. The pleadings and parties' filings disclosed that the property had been subdivided into 250 plots sold to third parties, who had attempted out-of-court settlement. These were relevant factors that ought to have been considered, making the assessment erroneous.
Higher scale taxation under Paragraph 50A
Higher scale taxation requires an order of the court on special grounds; absent such a direction, the taxing officer does not err in taxing attendances on the lower scale
The applicant faulted the taxing officer for taxing court attendances on the ordinary scale. The ruling showed she did so because there was no direction from the judge in the underlying suit for higher scale costs. Paragraph 50A permits higher scale taxation only on special grounds arising from the nature, importance, difficulty or urgency of the case, and no such order was made. The court could not fault the taxing officer on this ground.
Legal principles established
#- Instruction fees are assessed on the value of the subject matter of the suit as ascertained from the pleadings, the judgment, or a settlement, and all relevant factors appearing on the record must be considered
Court orders
#- 1.Prayer number 1 of the application dated 20/8/2019 allowed
- 2.The Applicant's bill of costs is remitted back for taxation by a different taxing officer
- 3.No order as to costs
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Reference against decision of the Deputy Registrar (taxing officer) on an advocate-client bill of costs under the Advocates Remuneration Order
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Kemboy Law Advocates v Raana Sheldon & 2 others (Suing as Legal Representatives of the Estate of Doctor Yusuf Ali Eraj) [2020] KEELC 98 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2020). Application filed 21/8/2019 (dated 20th August 2019). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2020/98/eng@2020-12-17
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.