Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCPartially AllowedCause No 67 of 2014· [2016] KEELRC 941 (KLR)

Kenya Union of Commercial Food and Allied Workers v Mutuguta Farmers Co-operative Society Ltd [2016] KEELRC 941 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
15 July 2016
BOByram Ongaya
825 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

#

A Kenyan court set aside a lawyer's costs certificate because no taxation reasons were provided, ruling the usual 14-day objection deadline doesn't strictly apply in that situation.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The claimant, Boniface M. Kavuvi, moved the Employment and Labour Relations Court at Nyeri by chamber summons dated 12.02.2016 and filed on 16.02.2016 under rule 11 of the Advocates (Remuneration) Order, section 12 of the Employment and Labour Relations Court Act and section 3A of the Civil Procedure Act. He sought stay of execution of the decree and certificate of taxation, setting aside of the taxation, and an order that the respondent's bill of costs be taxed afresh with leave to raise objections. The respondent opposed through grounds of opposition describing the application as misconceived, incompetent and an abuse of process. The court traced the history: on 06.11.2015 it had extended the time for filing an objection to the taxing master's decision, and the claimant filed his notice of objection on 19.11.2015, within the extended period lapsing about 21.11.2015. The claimant then requested the deputy registrar's reasons for taxation; on 18.01.2016 he was told no reasons existed because the taxing master was on leave. The court held that since no reasons were provided, the 14-day period under subparagraph 11(2) did not strictly apply, and the application filed about two days after the lapse of that period was without inordinate delay. Allowing the application in its inherent jurisdiction, the court set aside the certificate of costs issued on 03.06.2015, ordered a fresh taxation with leave to the claimant to object, and awarded the claimant the costs of the application. Judgment delivered at Nyeri on 15 July 2016 by Byram Ongaya, Judge.

Key legal issues

#
01

Timeliness of the reference where no reasons for taxation were supplied

Holding

The reference was filed without inordinate delay and in time, since the statutory 14-day period could not strictly run in the absence of reasons

Reasoning

Subparagraph 11(2) required an application within 14 days where a party is dissatisfied with reasons forwarded by the taxing master. Here the deputy registrar confirmed no reasons existed because the taxing master was on leave. The court therefore held the prescribed period inapplicable and found only about 2 days' delay, which was not inordinate, and invoked the court's inherent powers to permit the application.

p. 2
02

Timeliness of the notice of objection to taxation

Holding

The objection filed on 19.11.2015 was within the 14-day period as extended by the court's order of 06.11.2015, which lapsed on or about 21.11.2015

Reasoning

The court's earlier order extended the time for filing the objection to 14 days from 06.11.2015. The claimant signed the notice on 18.11.2015 and filed it on 19.11.2015, before the extended period lapsed on 21.11.2015, so the objection was validly on record.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • Where the taxing master furnishes no reasons for taxation, the 14-day period for filing an application under paragraph 11(2) of the Advocates (Remuneration) Order does not strictly apply

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The certificate of costs issued on 03.06.2015 is set aside
  2. 2.The respondent's bill of costs be taxed afresh granting the claimant leave to defend and raise objections to the bill of costs in the usual manner
  3. 3.The respondent to pay costs of the application

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Advocates (Remuneration) OrderRule 11, subparagraphs 11(1) and 11(2)
  • Employment and Labour Relations Court ActSection 12
  • Civil Procedure ActSection 3A
Jurisdiction invoked
Rule 11 of the Advocates (Remuneration) Order, Section 12 of the Employment and Labour Relations Court Act, Section 3A of the Civil Procedure Act

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Kenya Union of Commercial Food and Allied Workers v Mutuguta Farmers Co-operative Society Ltd [2016] KEELRC 941 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2016). Cause No 67 of 2014. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2016/941/eng@2016-07-15

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