Thamaini v Wangai & 2 others (Environment & Land Case E246 of 2021) [2024] KEELC 4922 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The Environment and Land Court ruled that challenging a taxed costs bill requires proving a real error of principle, not just unhappiness with the amount.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the taxing officer erred in principle in assessing instruction fees at Kes.300,000/= using Schedule 6(b) of the Advocates Remuneration Order 2014
No error of principle; where the value of the suit property is not discernible from pleadings or judgment, the taxing officer exercises discretion on rational factors, and the award was subjected to 75% for summary determination
The court found the suit property in Nairobi had a value exceeding the magistrates' court pecuniary jurisdiction, justifying filing in the ELC. The taxing officer's thought process was informed by Schedule 6 factors and the award was reduced by 75% for summary disposal. Quantum questions are for taxing officers, interferable with only where so high or so low as to constitute error of principle.
Whether the taxation ought to correspond with the taxation in a related file (ELC E258 of 2020) where costs were certified at Kes.166,210/=
No; taxation is discretionary and varies between judicial officers; consistency does not demand identical outcomes
The court held that taxation is not a mechanical or arithmetic exercise and no two officers are obliged to reach the same figure. Consistency, as underscored in Premchand Raichand, does not denote sameness of outcome.
What orders ought to be granted
The Reference is devoid of merits and is dismissed
Having found no error of principle or extraneous factors, the Applicant failed to establish the requisite grounds for interference with the certificate of taxation. It is not enough to say an award of costs is high; it must be shown to be manifestly excessive or inordinately low as to represent an error in principle.
Legal principles established
#- A party seeking to impugn a certificate of taxation must demonstrate an error of principle; mere dissatisfaction with quantum is insufficient
- Taxation of costs is a discretionary exercise; consistency between decisions does not require identical outcomes
Court orders
#- 1.The Chamber Summons Application [Reference] dated the 21st August 2023 be and is hereby dismissed.
- 2.Costs of the Reference be and are hereby awarded to the 1st Defendant/Respondent.
- 3.To avoid the filing of additional/supplemental bill of costs, such costs are hereby certified in the sum of Kes.25, 000/= only.
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Sections 1A, 1B and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act and Rule 11 of the Advocates (Remuneration) Order 1962
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Thamaini v Wangai & 2 others (Environment & Land Case E246 of 2021) [2024] KEELC 4922 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2024). Chamber Summons Application dated 21st August 2023 (arising from Milimani ELC proceedings re L.R No. Nairobi/Block 97/2347). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2024/4922/eng@2024-06-24
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.