Hakika Transport Services Limited v Isaac Onyango & Company Advocates [2021] KEELRC 999 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan client lost its bid to overturn a taxed legal fees bill because it never objected to the Taxing Master first and couldn't prove a fee agreement existed.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the Client could challenge the Taxing Master's award on the basis of an alleged global fee agreement not raised at taxation
The application failed because the alleged agreement was not established on the evidence and the objection was improperly brought.
Rule 11 requires an objector to identify items objected to and obtain the Taxing Master's reasons before a reference. The Client filed a fresh application on a separate file, depriving the Court of the taxation proceedings, and had raised no objection at taxation. On the merits, the Client's silence for nearly a year after the fee schedule, followed by payment only after the Bill was served, pointed to payment on account of the Bill, not an agreed fee.
Whether Article 159 could cure the Client's procedural default
Article 159 does not excuse every procedural rule; the Client's procedural missteps could not be side-stepped.
The Court accepted the principle that substantive justice matters, but held that not every rule of procedure may be disregarded without injustice to the other side. The Respondent relied on authority that Article 159 is not a magic bullet for litigation defaults, and the Court aligned itself with that view in refusing to overlook the defects.
Legal principles established
#- An issue that was not raised before the Taxing Master cannot be the subject of an objection at reference
- An agreement on fees may be construed from a series of correspondence between advocate and client; absent such exchange, no agreement arises
Court orders
#- 1.The application dated 24th March 2021 is disallowed with costs to the Advocate
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Rule 11(1) & (2) of the Advocates (Remuneration) Order, Sections 1A & 3A of the Civil Procedure Act and Article 159 of the Constitution
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Hakika Transport Services Limited v Isaac Onyango & Company Advocates [2021] KEELRC 999 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2021). Chamber Summons dated 24th March 2021 (ELRC Miscellaneous Application No 5 of 2020 taxation referred). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2021/999/eng@2021-09-23
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.