Njeru Nyaga & Co. Advocates v Muriuki (Environment & Land Miscellaneous Case 65 of 2020) [2022] KEELC 2435 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The High Court confirmed that a lawyer-client fee agreement can be inferred from emails and conduct alone, even without a signed document.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether a retainer agreement existed between the advocate and the client
Yes - the retainer agreement was properly inferred from email correspondence between the parties, and the Taxing Master's finding on that point was correct.
The court adopted the Omulele & Tollo distinction between a retainer (the relationship of instruction or engagement) and a retainer agreement (the written terms including fees). It held that a retainer agreement need not be in writing and may be inferred from conduct or circumstances. On the material, the Taxing Master had relied on email correspondence to find a retainer agreement, and on review of her decision the judge found she considered the material placed before her and was right. The reference therefore lacked merit.
Legal principles established
#- A retainer agreement does not necessarily have to be in writing and may be inferred from the conduct of the parties or the circumstances of the case, including email correspondence.
Court orders
#- 1.The Application dated October 13, 2021 is dismissed with no orders as to costs
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Reference against decision of the Taxing Master on an advocate/client bill of costs
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Njeru Nyaga & Co. Advocates v Muriuki (Environment & Land Miscellaneous Case 65 of 2020) [2022] KEELC 2435 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2022). Application dated 13th October 2021. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2022/2435/eng@2022-05-05
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.