Wandaka t/a Kinuthia Wandaka & Company Advocates v Musyoki (Environment and Land Miscellaneous Application 10 of 2020) [2025] KEELC 4665 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan client must pay her lawyer Kshs 513,830 in taxed fees plus 14% yearly interest because she couldn't reopen the already-settled lawyer-client relationship.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether retainer being contested bars entry of judgment under Section 51(2) of the Advocates Act
The retainer issue had already been determined by C. Ochieng' J in the Ruling of 26th April 2021, which found an implied advocate/client relationship and estopped the Respondent from denying the retainer; the objection therefore fails.
The court reviewed the prior Ruling of 26th April 2021 in which the court found the Respondent had authorized the advocate, admitted in matrimonial property proceedings and in a letter dated 19th October 2017 that the advocate acted for her, creating an implied advocate/client relationship and an estoppel. That determination is a valid court order unless set aside, altered or appealed against, so the retainer could not be relitigated to defeat the Section 51(2) application.
Whether the taxed costs remain enforceable and whether interest should be awarded
The Certificate of Taxation dated 5th April 2022 for Kshs. 513,830 was unchallenged and remains valid; judgment was entered with interest at 14% per annum from the date of the certificate.
The Bill of Costs was taxed at Kshs. 513,830 on 30th March 2022 and a Certificate of Taxation issued on 5th April 2022, which was never set aside, altered or referenced against. Rule 7 of the Advocates Remuneration Rules permits interest at 14% per annum on costs from the expiration of one month from delivery of the bill. No circumstances were shown to justify withholding or reducing the interest, so the court entered judgment with interest from the date of the certificate.
Legal principles established
#- Where a certificate of taxation has been issued and has not been set aside, altered or referenced against, judgment may properly be entered under Section 51(2) of the Advocates Act.
- Where the issue of retainer has already been determined by a valid court order, opposition to entry of judgment on the ground that the retainer is disputed fails.
Court orders
#- 1.Judgment entered for the Applicant against the Respondent for Kshs. 513,830
- 2.Interest at 14% per annum on Kshs. 513,830 from the date of issuance of the Certificate of Taxation (5th April 2022) until payment in full
- 3.Costs of the application to be borne by the Respondent
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Section 51(2) of the Advocates Act; Section 3A of the Civil Procedure Act; Order 50 Rules 1 & 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Wandaka t/a Kinuthia Wandaka & Company Advocates v Musyoki (Environment and Land Miscellaneous Application 10 of 2020) [2025] KEELC 4665 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/4665/eng@2025-06-19
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.