Josvir Traders & Agencies Limited v Kiruni & 2 others; Wambu t/a Chador Auctioneers (Respondent) (Environment and Land Case 174 of 2018) [2025] KEELC 6484 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The High Court dismissed a bid to force an auctioneer to release Kshs. 6 million in fees, ruling fee disputes must go through formal assessment.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the High Court is the proper forum for a decree holder seeking release of monies retained by an auctioneer as fees
The application was not properly before the court; Rule 55 requires such fee disputes to be resolved by taxation or assessment before the Registrar, a Magistrate or the Auctioneers Licensing Board.
The court held that Rule 55 of the Auctioneers Rules deliberately channels disputes over auctioneers' fees to assessment by the Registrar, Magistrate or Board. Entertaining an application for direct release of funds would substitute the prescribed procedure with judicial intervention. The court distinguished between the forum for disputing fees and the auctioneer's continuing fiduciary duty under Rule 19 to safeguard client monies.
Whether concurrent proceedings before the Auctioneers Licensing Board and the High Court on the same allegations could be maintained
No; the duplication of proceedings on indistinguishable allegations offended the exhaustion doctrine and judicial order.
The Applicant had already lodged a complaint before the Auctioneers Licensing Board in Disciplinary Cause No. 7 of 2025 on substantially the same allegations. The court held that permitting concurrent proceedings would multiply litigation and undermine the constitutional preference for specialized dispute-resolution mechanisms, invoking the exhaustion doctrine as affirmed in Karume and Ramogi.
Legal principles established
#- Where a statute prescribes a specific procedure for redress of a grievance, that procedure must be strictly followed and exhausted before resorting to the court
- Disputes as to the quantum of auctioneer's fees must be assessed by the Registrar, Magistrate or the Board under Rule 55, and unilateral retention is not permitted
- An auctioneer remains under a fiduciary duty under Rule 19 to hold client monies in a clients' account and may only deduct fees properly chargeable
Court orders
#- 1.The application dated 21st February 2025 is dismissed
- 2.No order as to costs
- 3.The dismissal is without prejudice to the Applicant's right to seek redress in the proper forum under Rule 55 of the Auctioneers Rules
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Inherent jurisdiction of the High Court in execution/decree proceedings (Auctioneers Act and Auctioneers Rules, 1997 framework); no specific constitutional or statutory provision invoked
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Josvir Traders & Agencies Limited v Kiruni & 2 others; Wambu t/a Chador Auctioneers (Respondent) (Environment and Land Case 174 of 2018) [2025] KEELC 6484 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in the judgment as provided. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/6484/eng@2025-09-29
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.