Gikaria t/a Anthony Gikaria & Co. Advocates v Mundia & others (Miscellaneous Application E006 - E013 of 2024) [2025] KEELC 6760 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court dismissed all eight challenges to a taxed advocate-client bill, ruling the applicants had no credible excuse for filing their objections months late.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether enlargement of time to lodge a reference under Rule 11 of the Advocates' Remuneration Order was merited
Not merited; the applicant was represented throughout the taxation proceedings by M/S Santa Munga & Co. Advocates and gave no credible explanation for the delay, and the grant ad litem obtained in January 2025 was a red herring
Rule 11(2) requires objection within 14 days, though Rule 11(4) permits enlargement. The court found the applicant had legal representation, participated in multiple taxation dates through advocate Munga, signed transmission documents in 2021, and received a title in 2022, yet only raised the advocate-client relationship issue after obtaining letters of administration ad litem in January 2025. The belated grant ad litem for Margaret Wanjiru Mundia was a red herring to avoid responsibility.
Whether the taxing master's ruling of 16.12.2024 should be set aside or varied
It stands; the application was dismissed and the preliminary objection and reference arguments fell by the wayside
Having found no merit in the enlargement of time, the arguments in the preliminary objection and reference necessarily failed. Further, even if properly on record, they would not have succeeded because the applicant never contested the issues before the taxing master despite being given repeated chances to file a response, and the instructions of 1.7.2021 came from the joint administrators who alone had the mandate to distribute the estate under Section 83 of the Law of Succession Act.
Whether there was an advocate-client relationship between the applicants and the advocate
Yes; the advocate was instructed by the joint personal representatives, the applicants signed transmission documents and received titles, and none rebutted those facts
The letter of instructions dated 1.7.2021 was issued by the joint administrators of the estate of Kigathi Mundia. All the applicants signed transmission forms and were issued titles on 20.1.2022, and did not rebut the averment that they signed the transmission documents. Their supporting affidavits wrongly claimed they were beneficiaries of Margaret Wanjiru Mundia's estate, and they could not distinguish the living Margaret who swore an affidavit from the deceased Margaret.
Whether the bill of costs should have been filed at Nyeri rather than Nanyuki (territorial jurisdiction)
The point was raised too late and the advocate contended, without judicial finding, that taxation belongs at the court nearest the subject land (Burguret), i.e. Nanyuki
The advocate averred the issue was not raised before the taxing master, and that the succession proceedings in Nyeri were separate from the taxation of work done to process titles; secondary matters touching on the assets should be filed at the nearest court with territorial jurisdiction, Nanyuki being nearest to Burguret. The court, having dismissed the applications, made no separate finding on this point.
Legal principles established
#- Courts may enlarge time under Rule 11(4) of the ARO but the applicant must advance credible reasons for the delay
- Parties must make full disclosure of all material facts in judicial proceedings, including succession cases
- Joint administrators of an estate have the legal mandate to distribute it under Section 83 of the Law of Succession Act
Court orders
#- 1.All the Chamber Summons Applications as well as the Preliminary Objections dated 10.3.2025 in the 8 miscellaneous suits (E006 OF 2024 - E013 OF 2024) are found to be unmerited and are dismissed with costs to the advocate in each file
- 2.The firm of Charles G Mbau is granted leave to come on record for the applicants
- 3.The advocate's application dated 20.2.2025 to be set down for hearing
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Rule 11 of the Advocates' Remuneration Order (references from a taxing master's decision to a Judge)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Gikaria t/a Anthony Gikaria & Co. Advocates v Mundia & others (Miscellaneous Application E006 - E013 of 2024) [2025] KEELC 6760 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Miscellaneous Suit E006 of 2024 (with E007–E013 of 2024). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/6760/eng@2025-10-01
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.