Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCDismissedChamber Summons dated 9-10-2025 (Reference from taxation ruling dated 25-9-2025)· [2026] KEELC 2379 (KLR)

Mungai v Njoroge, Githua, Waithaka & Kinuu (All sued in their capacity as joint liquidators of Planters Cooperative Union Limited) & 2 others (Environment and Land Case 8 of 2018) [2026] KEELC 2379 (KLR)

High Court of Kenya
29 April 2026
768 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~3 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

The High Court dismissed a challenge to a taxing officer's decision, confirming that legal costs must be based only on relief actually awarded by the court.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This ruling by M.N. Gicheru J at Murang'a determines a chamber summons dated 9-10-2025 by the Plaintiff under Article 159 of the Constitution, Sections 1A, 1B and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act and paragraph 11(1)-(4) of the Advocates Remuneration Order, 1962. The Plaintiff, whose bill of costs claimed Kshs 134,289,303 but attracted only Kshs 7,134,217 in taxation, sought setting aside of the taxing officer's decision of 25-9-2025, referral for re-taxation by a different taxing officer, and re-taxation of instruction and getting-up fees. He argued the taxing officer erred in principle, failed to determine the value of the subject matter, ignored 15 parcels of land and a valuation report by G.K. Mutugi and Associates, arbitrarily adopted Kshs 51 Million as the subject value, and misapplied the principles in Joreth Ltd vs. Kigano and Associates. The 1st Defendant opposed, noting the valuation was by the Plaintiff's own valuer, the subject matter was 75 acres not 860, and two appeals were pending at the Court of Appeal. Framing three issues, the court held the taxing officer properly appreciated the value of the subject matter: prayer (h) of the amended counterclaim seeking the market value of 860 acres was never granted in the judgment dated 7-11-2024, and it was improper to peg costs on unawarded relief. Finding no merit in the summons, the court dismissed it with costs to the 1st Defendant.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the taxing officer properly appreciated the value of the subject matter

Holding

The taxing officer properly appreciated the value of the subject matter; the plaintiff improperly pegged the bill on the unawarded value of 860 acres

Reasoning

Prayer (h) of the amended counterclaim seeking payment of the current market value of 860 acres was not granted in the judgment dated 7-11-2024. What were granted were prayers (a), (b), (d), (e), (f) and (g), including a Kshs 51 Million award to the 1st Defendant. Since nothing else was awarded to the Plaintiff, the taxing officer properly valued the subject matter for purposes of instruction and getting-up fees.

p. 2
02

Whether the Plaintiff is entitled to the reliefs sought in the summons

Holding

The decision of the taxing officer was proper and the Plaintiff is not entitled to any of the reliefs sought; the reference was dismissed

Reasoning

Having found no error of principle in the taxation, the court concluded the summons lacked merit. The pending appeals at the Court of Appeal (E218 of 2024 and E060 of 2025) with unknown outcomes did not alter this position. The reference was dismissed with costs to the 1st Defendant.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • A party may not peg instruction fees on the value of relief that was not actually awarded in the judgment

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The summons dated 9-10-2025 is dismissed
  2. 2.Costs of the reference awarded to the 1st Defendant
Jurisdiction invoked
Article 159 of the Constitution of Kenya; Sections 1A, 1B and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act; paragraph 11(1)-(4) of the Advocates Remuneration Order, 1962

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Mungai v Njoroge, Githua, Waithaka & Kinuu (All sued in their capacity as joint liquidators of Planters Cooperative Union Limited) & 2 others (Environment and Land Case 8 of 2018) [2026] KEELC 2379 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Chamber Summons dated 9-10-2025 (Reference from taxation ruling dated 25-9-2025). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/2379/eng@2026-04-29

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.