Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCPartially AllowedNot stated in judgment· [2022] KEELC 1811 (KLR)

Akide & Company Advocates v Registered Trustees of the Kenya Railways Staff Retirement Benefits Scheme [2022] KEELC 1811 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court of Kenya
3 February 2022
EWE. K. Wabwoto
809 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~3 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan court converted a lawyer's taxed fee certificate into a Kshs 9.3 million judgment but refused 14% interest because the lawyer never demanded interest in writing.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This was a Notice of Motion dated 17th September 2021 brought by the Applicant advocate under Section 51 of the Advocates Act, seeking to have a Certificate of Taxation dated 1st July 2021 deemed a judgment and decree, and judgment entered against the Respondent for taxed costs of Kshs. 9,304,986.00 plus interest at 14% per annum under Rule 7 of the Advocates (Remuneration) Order. The fees arose from instructions to prepare documentation and conduct hearings before the National Land Commission concerning reviews of grants over various L.R numbers. The application was unopposed; service was proved by an Affidavit of Service sworn by Jairus Nduru, and no appeal or reference against the taxation was pending. The court, per E. K. Wabwoto J, identified the sole issue as whether the application was merited. Applying Section 51(2), the court held that the certificate was not disputed and entered judgment for Kshs. 9,304,986.00. However, it declined interest, holding that Regulation 7 requires not only service of the bill but also a raised claim for interest after one month from delivery; the annexures, including the demand for settlement, showed no such demand. On costs, the court exercised its discretion, noting the Respondent had not resisted, and directed each party to bear its own costs. Judgment was delivered virtually at Nairobi on 3rd February 2022, the application being allowed in part: judgment for the taxed sum, interest declined, and no costs of the application.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether judgment should be entered on the Certificate of Taxation

Holding

Yes; the Respondent was duly served, did not dispute the Certificate of Taxation, and judgment was entered for Kshs. 9,304,986.00.

Reasoning

Section 51(2) of the Advocates Act makes the taxing officer's certificate final unless set aside or altered by the Court, and permits entry of judgment for the certified sum where the retainer is not disputed. Service was proved by an Affidavit of Service, the application was unopposed, and no appeal or reference was pending, so judgment followed.

p. 1
02

Whether the Applicant was entitled to interest at 14% per annum

Holding

No; interest was declined because no demand for interest was raised.

Reasoning

Regulation 7 requires that one month lapse from delivery of the bill and that the claim for interest be raised before the bill is paid or tendered in full. The court found the bill was served but no demand for interest appeared in the annexures, notably the demand for settlement of taxed costs, so no award of interest could be made.

p. 1

Legal principles established

#
  • A Certificate of Taxation not set aside or altered is final as to the amount of costs, and judgment may be entered where the retainer is not disputed.
  • Interest under Regulation 7 of the Advocates (Remuneration) Order requires that one month lapse from delivery of the bill and that a claim for interest be raised before payment or tender in full.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Judgment be entered in favour of the Applicant against the Respondent for Ksh 9,304,986.00
  2. 2.The claim for interest is declined
  3. 3.Each party to bear its own costs of the application

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Advocates ActSection 51(2)
  • Advocates (Remuneration) OrderRule/Regulation 7
Jurisdiction invoked
Section 51 of the Advocates Act

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Akide & Company Advocates v Registered Trustees of the Kenya Railways Staff Retirement Benefits Scheme [2022] KEELC 1811 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2022). Not stated in judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2022/1811/eng@2022-02-03

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.