Bruce Odeny & Company Advocates v Alila & another (Environment and Land Miscellaneous Application E017 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 3780 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court confirmed that unpaid legal fees become enforceable court judgment once a certificate of taxation stands unchallenged, with interest accruing until full payment.
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 certificate of taxation issued on 29th July 2025 should be converted into a decree and judgment of the court with interest
- 2.Whether the Respondents' claim that they paid the entire fees to the Advocate precludes entry of judgment
Key legal issues
#Whether judgment may be entered on the certificate of taxation under Section 51(2) of the Advocates Act
Judgment was entered in terms of the certificate of taxation, which certified costs at Kshs.185,175.40 against the 1st and 2nd Respondents, with interest at court rates from the date of the certificate.
The Advocate-Client Bill of Costs dated 18th February 2025 for Kshs.247,164.60 was taxed at Kshs.185,175.40 and a certificate of taxation issued. The Respondents were served but did not attend the taxation. The certificate remains unreviewed and unchallenged by any reference, so under Section 51(2) it is final as to the amount of costs and the court may enter judgment. The Respondents' assertion of payment was a matter for the taxation process.
Whether the Respondents' defence of full payment could defeat the application
The claim that the Respondents paid Kshs.108,000/- to the Advocate was an issue that ought to have been raised and dealt with in the taxation, not in the conversion application.
The Respondents opposed the application on the ground that they had paid the entire amount of fees, totalling Kshs.108,000/-, to the Advocate. The court held that such issues belong in the taxation proceedings and, absent a reference challenging the taxation, the unreviewed certificate stands and supports entry of judgment under Section 51(2).
Legal principles established
#- A certificate of taxation that is not set aside or altered by the court is final as to the amount of costs covered by it and judgment may be entered on it where the retainer is not disputed
- Objections to a taxation must be raised by way of a reference; they cannot be raised for the first time in an application to convert the certificate into a decree
Court orders
#- 1.Judgment entered in favour of the Advocate/Applicant in terms of the certificate of taxation
- 2.The taxed costs to attract interest at court rates from the date of the certificate of taxation until payment in full
- 3.Each party to bear their own costs of the application
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Section 51(2) of the Advocates Act
Relief refused
#Costs of the application provided for in favour of the Applicant
The court ordered each party to bear their own costs of the application
Costs
Each party to bear their own costs of the application
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.
As the certificate of taxation remains unreviewed, the application is allowed. Judgment is entered in favour of the Advocate/Applicant in terms of the certificate of taxation.
The taxed costs shall attract interest at court rates from the date of the certificate of taxation till payment in full. Each party to bear their own costs of the application.
The issues that the Respondents are raising herein are issues that ought to have been raised and dealt with in the taxation. There is no Reference filed challenging the taxation.
Issues in the judgment
#The certificate of taxation is described as dated 18th September, 2025 and issued on 29th September, 2025, but the motion seeks to convert a 'certificate of taxation issued on 29th July, 2025', an internal inconsistency in dates
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Bruce Odeny & Company Advocates v Alila & another (Environment and Land Miscellaneous Application E017 of 2025) [2026] KEELC 3780 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). ELCL MISC APPL E017/2025. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/3780/eng@2026-06-18
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.