Bishop Thomas Kogo & Another (suing as trustees of Health Centre) v Uasin Gishu County Government & Others

The court held that costs are discretionary under Section 27 of the Civil Procedure Act, and although costs follow the event, a judge may for good reason order otherwise. The plaintiff, being a non-profit trust, advanced a persuasive argument but raised it too late - four years after the withdrawal order, taxation and issuance of the Certificate of Costs and commencement of execution. Having not sought exemption at withdrawal and not sought review, the plaintiff could not revisit the costs order.

The application sought only a determination on entitlement to costs, not review or setting aside of the December 2018 costs order. Since the order was made by a judge of concurrent jurisdiction, this court could not sit on appeal over it. The taxation had also already occurred, with a Certificate of Costs issued and execution set in motion, rendering the sought stay of taxation academic.

The 2nd Defendant deposed that it is entitled to costs in the same way it would pay costs in a civil matter if ordered. The court did not expressly bar the County Government from claiming costs, and its reasoning proceeded on the basis that the December 2018 costs order in favour of the Defendants, including the 2nd Defendant, was valid and stood, having already been taxed.