Gichuki (Suing as one of the Administrators of the Estate of Jaidus Gichuki Peter) v Gichuki & 4 others (Environment & Land Miscellaneous Case E073 of 2025) [2025] KEELC 4486 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Environment and Land Court refused to disturb a taxing master's KES 300,000 fees award, confirming judges won't intervene unless a legal principle was clearly misapplied.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the taxing officer erred in taxing the 3rd respondent's bill of costs dated 4th November 2024
No error; the award of KES 300,000 instruction fees was reasonable and confined to the court's ruling of 17th October 2024 which awarded costs of the suit, the application and the two preliminary objections.
The court applied the Premchand Raichand principles and Joreth Ltd v Kigano & Associates. The taxing officer had noted that no defences were filed and the value of the suit property was unascertainable from the pleadings, and she explained her reasoning leading to KES 300,000. The court read the ruling's costs order as covering the suit, the application and the preliminary objections, noting the semi-colon showed related but independent items. Interference is warranted only on error of principle, none of which was demonstrated; quantum alone is not a ground.
Whether the court's orders should apply mutatis mutandis to the 2nd respondent's pending bill of costs
Refused; the court lacks jurisdiction over a bill not yet taxed and cannot anticipate the taxing officer's outcome.
The jurisdiction on reference arises only when the taxing officer has pronounced herself on a bill of costs. Granting the order would presume the taxing officer has a predetermined position. There exists a proper forum to dispense with the pending bill, and the court will not interfere with another forum's jurisdiction based on speculation.
Legal principles established
#- A court on reference will not interfere with a taxing officer's assessment unless an error of principle is shown, though manifest extravagance may infer such misdirection.
- Where the value of the subject matter is not ascertainable from the pleadings, the taxing officer may exercise discretion to assess a just instruction fee.
- A reference lies only against a taxation already pronounced; a court will not stay or pre-empt a pending taxation based on speculation.
Court orders
#- 1.The chamber summons dated 28th March, 2025 is dismissed with costs.
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Paragraphs 11(2) and 13A of the Advocates (Remuneration) Order, 2014
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Gichuki (Suing as one of the Administrators of the Estate of Jaidus Gichuki Peter) v Gichuki & 4 others (Environment & Land Miscellaneous Case E073 of 2025) [2025] KEELC 4486 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Chamber Summons dated 28th March, 2025. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/4486/eng@2025-06-16
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.