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 AllowedChamber Summons dated 05/04/2022· [2022] KEELC 3277 (KLR)

Tesot & 2 others (Officials of Umoja wa Wanawake Kipkeikei Women Group) v Ruto & 2 others (Environment and Land Miscellaneous Application 6 of 2022) [2022] KEELC 3277 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
27 July 2022
FNFRED NYAGAKA
1,688 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~7 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan court confirmed that lawyers cannot execute taxed costs until 14 days pass after a taxing master's decision, and longer where written reasons are requested.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Applicants, aggrieved by a taxation ruling delivered on 08/03/2022 by Hon. C.M. Kesse (DR) assessing the Respondent's bill of costs, filed a Chamber Summons dated 05/04/2022 seeking enlargement of time to file a reference out of time, stay of execution of the ruling, an order interrogating or remitting contested items of the bill, and costs. They contended the Taxing Master erred in treating the bill as advocate-client rather than party-and-party, that the assessment was excessive, and that their delay was attributable to the Taxing Master's failure to furnish reasons despite two written requests dated 17/03/2022 and 31/03/2022. The Respondents opposed via grounds of opposition and submissions, alleging undue lethargy, an omnibus and muddled application filed before leave was granted, and noting a similar stay application had been dismissed in the Court of Appeal. The court framed three issues: enlargement of time, stay of execution, and appropriate orders. It found the enlargement prayer premature because, under Paragraph 11 of the Advocates Remuneration Order, time to file a reference only begins upon receipt of the Taxing Master's reasons, which were never furnished. On stay, the court held that execution of taxed costs must await expiry of 14 days from the taxation decision, or from the furnishing of reasons where timely requested; the warrants issued were therefore premature and illegal, and stay issued as a matter of right pending those periods. The court deprecated omnibus applications. The application partly succeeded: the Taxing Master was ordered to furnish reasons within 14 days, execution was stayed pending the giving of reasons and the 14-day window thereafter, and costs were left to abide the intended reference.

Key legal issues

#
01

Enlargement of time to file a reference against a Taxing Master's decision

Holding

The prayer was premature; time had not started running because the Taxing Master had not furnished reasons as required under Paragraph 11 of the Advocates Remuneration Order

Reasoning

Paragraph 11 of the Advocates Remuneration Order requires an aggrieved party to first request reasons from the Taxing Master, and only after receipt of those reasons does the party have 14 days to move the court by chamber summons. Since the reasons were never furnished, the 14-day period for filing the reference had not commenced, making an extension of time unnecessary and premature at this stage.

p. 3
02

Stay of execution of taxed costs pending a reference

Holding

Stay was granted as a matter of right because the warrants of execution were issued prematurely, before expiry of the statutory 14-day periods tied to the giving of reasons

Reasoning

The court held that execution of taxed costs must await expiry of 14 days from the taxing decision (where no reasons requested) or 14 days after reasons are furnished (where requested in time). Execution commenced earlier is premature and illegal. Since the warrants were premature, stay issued automatically pending the described periods, as the intended reference would otherwise be rendered nugatory.

p. 4

Legal principles established

#
  • Execution of taxed costs should not issue until 14 days after the taxing master's decision where no reasons are requested, or 14 days after reasons are given where reasons were requested in time; earlier execution is premature and illegal

Court orders

#
  1. 1.An order directing the Taxing Master to furnish the Applicant with reasons for her Ruling dated 08/03/2022 within 14 days from the date of the ruling
  2. 2.Stay of execution of the Respondent's bill of costs pending the giving of reasons by the Taxing Master and the expiry of the 14-day window thereafter
  3. 3.Costs to abide by the intended Reference
Jurisdiction invoked
Paragraph 11 of the Advocates Remuneration Order and Order 50 Rule 6 / Order 42 Rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Rules

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Tesot & 2 others (Officials of Umoja wa Wanawake Kipkeikei Women Group) v Ruto & 2 others (Environment and Land Miscellaneous Application 6 of 2022) [2022] KEELC 3277 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2022). Chamber Summons dated 05/04/2022. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2022/3277/eng@2022-07-27

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