JM Njenga & Co. Advocates LLP v Kimuri Housing Company Ltd (Environment and Land Miscellaneous Case E075 of 2024) [2025] KEELC 5938 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Environment and Land Court ordered four items of an advocate's bill of costs re-taxed before a different taxing master because the original ruling left key items unaddressed.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether the taxing officer fell into error in terms of items 1, 2, 171 and 197 as contained in the Bill of Costs
Key legal issues
#Whether the taxing officer erred in principle in taxing items 1, 2, 171 and 197 of the bill of costs
Yes - the taxing officer taxed only item 1, was silent on item 2, and this silence had a ripple effect on items 171 and 197, warranting reference back for re-taxation
The court applied the established Premchand Raichand principles governing interference with a taxing officer's discretion. Examining the impugned ruling, the court noted that although the taxing officer acknowledged two consolidated files, only item 1 was taxed and the ruling was silent on item 2 (a claimed instruction fee of Kshs.16,700,000 based on estimated suit property value), which affected the consequential items 171 and 197. In the interest of justice, re-taxation before a different taxing master was warranted.
Legal principles established
#- A reference against a taxing officer's decision may only be allowed where the applicant demonstrates that the taxation principles were breached, or that the assessment is manifestly extravagant such that a misdirection of principle may be inferred
Court orders
#- 1.The taxation orders dated 15th July 2024, delivered on 26th July 2024, be reviewed and the matter referred back for re-taxation of items 1, 2, 171 and 197 before a different taxing master
- 2.No orders as to costs
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Paragraph 11(2) of the Advocates Remuneration Order
Relief refused
#Costs of the application
The court made no orders as to costs
Costs
No orders as to costs; each party to bear own costs
Quotable passages
#Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.
In the interest of justice, it is only fair that the matter is referred back for re-taxation of items 1, 2, 171 and 197 before a difierent taxing master.
if the quantum of an assessment is manifestly extravagant, a misdirection of principle may be a necessary inference.
Issues in the judgment
#The client/respondent is never named in the judgment; parties are referred to only generically
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "JM Njenga & Co. Advocates LLP v Kimuri Housing Company Ltd (Environment and Land Miscellaneous Case E075 of 2024) [2025] KEELC 5938 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Chamber Summons dated 12th August 2024. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/5938/eng@2025-08-14
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.