Melina Investments Limited v Cicco (Environment & Land Case 221 of 2017) [2025] KEELC 4146 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Environment and Land Court confirmed that every prayer in a plaint counts when valuing a suit for legal costs, and upheld the taxing master's award.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Instruction fee (Item 1) - value of the subject matter
The value of the subject matter was not limited to the monetary claims of euros 10,500 and Kshs 725,982.52; the prayers for surrender of the sub-lease and vacant possession involved the entire suit property
The court held that classifying prayers as 'substantive' or 'alternative' is misplaced in taxation. Any prayer at the foot of the plaint could have been granted. The prayers for surrender of the sub-lease and vacant possession upon forfeiture would have involved the entire suit property, so the taxing master was entitled to assess value on that basis. The getting up fee, not being impugned, also stands.
Disbursements (Item 17) - witness travel expenses
The taxing master properly allowed travel expenses under paragraph 74A(1) of the Advocates Remuneration Order; no error of principle was shown
The taxing master took into account that two witnesses testified, that only travel (not accommodation) was claimed, and that translation of foreign documents was necessary and supported by a certificate of translation. Paragraph 74A(1) permits reasonable witness charges including travel from abroad. The applicant showed no error of principle or irrelevant considerations.
Legal principles established
#- Any prayer sought in a plaint, whether substantive or alternative, is relevant in assessing the value of the subject matter for taxation purposes
- A court may interfere with a taxing officer's decision only where it is based on an error of principle or the fee is manifestly excessive
Court orders
#- 1.The plaintiff's application dated 18/11/2024 is dismissed
- 2.Costs of the application awarded to the defendants
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Articles 48 and 159(2) of the Constitution; Sections 1A, 1B and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act; Rule 11(1)(2) and (4) of the Advocates' Remuneration Order; Schedule 6 of the Advocates Remuneration (Amendment) Order 2014
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Melina Investments Limited v Cicco (Environment & Land Case 221 of 2017) [2025] KEELC 4146 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in judgment (Chamber Summons dated 18/11/2024). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/4146/eng@2025-05-27
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.