Mulekyo and Company Advocates v Mavoko Water and Sewerage Co Ltd (Environment and Land Miscellaneous Application E008 of 2023) [2025] KEELC 2914 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Machakos court set aside a legal fee assessment because the advocate's getting-up fee was wrongly calculated at Kshs. 200 instead of a third of the instruction fee.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the Taxing Master's taxation of the getting-up fee (Item 4) disclosed an error
The court found a mathematical error and an error in principle in the taxation of the getting-up fee, rendering the fees awarded incorrect
The getting-up fee under paragraph 2 of Schedule 6A should have been not less than one-third of the instruction fee allowed. Given the Taxing Master's own finding on Items 1 and 2 (Kshs. 200,000), taxing the getting-up fee at Kshs. 200 disclosed a mathematical error and an error of principle, justifying interference and setting aside the ruling.
The applicable principles for review of a Taxing Master's decision
Interference is warranted only on an error of principle, or where the fee is manifestly excessive or manifestly low, or where discretion was exercised capriciously
Drawing on First American Bank v Shah, Joreth Ltd v Kigano, Republic v Minister for Agriculture ex parte W'Njuguna and other authorities, the court restated that the taxing master's discretion is judicial and will not be disturbed merely because the judge would have reached a different figure; interference requires error of principle, capricious exercise, or an award so high or low as to cause injustice.
Legal principles established
#- A court will not interfere with a taxing officer's decision unless the decision was based on an error of principle or the fee awarded was manifestly excessive or manifestly low
- Where the taxing officer has erred in principle, the normal practice is to remit the assessment back for reassessment
Court orders
#- 1.The Ruling of the Taxing Officer delivered on 11th December 2023 in the ELC Misc. Application No. 08 of 2023 be set aside/vacated
- 2.The bill of costs is to be taxed by a different Taxing Officer
- 3.No order as to costs
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Paragraph 11(1) and (2) of the Advocates Remuneration Order
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Mulekyo and Company Advocates v Mavoko Water and Sewerage Co Ltd (Environment and Land Miscellaneous Application E008 of 2023) [2025] KEELC 2914 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). ELC Misc. Application No. 08 of 2023. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/2914/eng@2025-03-25
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.