Vincent Edward Njoroge v Kenol Kobil Limited [2018] KEELRC 1083 (KLR)
The bottom line
#What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Scope of the consent order adopted on 17.10.2017
The consent order settled only the Garnishee Application dated 2.10.2017; it did not determine the whole claim or the question of costs, so the extracted order was erroneous.
The consent of 11/10/2017 lifted the garnishee orders nisi against KICB Bank and Stanbic Bank and marked the application dated 2.10.2017 as settled. J. Ndolo's order of 17.10.2017 adopted that consent. The court found the later extracted order wrongly suggested the entire claim, including costs, had been determined, and directed correction to reflect what was actually ordered.
Entitlement to proceed to taxation after execution before taxation without leave
The Decree Holder waived the right to costs by executing before taxation without leave; the application to tax costs was disallowed.
Section 94 of the Civil Procedure Act requires a Decree Holder who wishes to execute before costs are ascertained by taxation to obtain leave, so that the Judgment Debtor can be heard. Relying on the cited authorities, the court held that executing without leave constitutes waiver of costs and that allowing taxation afterward would encourage multiple executions, vexing the Judgment Debtor and amounting to an abuse of process.
Legal principles established
#- Under Section 94 of the Civil Procedure Act, a Decree Holder who wishes to execute before taxation of costs must first obtain leave of the Court; executing without leave amounts to waiver of the right to costs
- A consent order records only what was actually determined; an extracted order that overstates the determination is erroneous and should be corrected
Court orders
#- 1.The order extracted dated 19.10.2017 declared erroneous insofar as it stated that the entire claim had been determined, and to be corrected to reflect the order of J. Ndolo of 17.10.2017 that only the Garnishee Application dated 2.10.2017 was determined
- 2.The application to proceed with taxation of costs declined/dismissed
- 3.No order as to costs
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Original jurisdiction of the Employment and Labour Relations Court over the claim, including review of its own orders; Section 94 of the Civil Procedure Act (Cap 21) applied on execution before taxation
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Vincent Edward Njoroge v Kenol Kobil Limited [2018] KEELRC 1083 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2018). Not stated in the judgment text provided. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2018/1083/eng@2018-09-27
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.