Kimonye v Kenya Meat Commission; Co-operative Bank Ltd (Athi River) (Garnishee) (Cause 465 of 2017) [2023] KEELRC 3024 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Employment Court set aside a costs ruling because the Taxing Master only considered the case's value and ignored all other required factors.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the Taxing Master committed errors of principle warranting interference with the taxation
Yes — the Taxing Master relied exclusively on the value of the subject matter, ignored other relevant statutory factors, did not address the parties' submissions and authorities, and failed to tax off ambiguous items
The court applied the settled test from Republic v Ministry of Agriculture ex parte Muchiri W. Njuguna and kindred authorities: interference lies only for error of principle or manifest excess. The ruling showed the Deputy Registrar addressed only the value of the subject matter in computing instruction fees, said nothing about the parties' submissions or authorities, and left ambiguous items un-taxed off. These omissions amounted to errors of principle, justifying setting aside and remittal for fresh taxation before a different Taxing Master.
Whether the formula in Schedule 6 Part B of the Advocates Remuneration Order must be applied in assessing instruction fees
Yes — adherence to the formula is mandatory as the basis for determining the basic instruction fee
The court held that the formula in Schedule 6 Part B of the Advocates Remuneration Order is not optional; it must be adhered to as a basis for determining the basic instruction fee and other items. The Taxing Officer's exclusive focus on the ascertained value of the subject matter, without considering the nature and importance of the matter, the interests of the parties and the complexity of the dispute, contravened this requirement and the factors articulated in the authorities.
Legal principles established
#- A court may only interfere with a Taxing Master's decision where it is shown there was an error of principle or the fee awarded was manifestly excessive as to suggest an error of principle; failure to consider relevant factors (or consideration of irrelevant ones) is an error of principle.
- The Taxing Master must consider the full complement of statutory factors — nature and importance of the matter, value of subject matter, interests of the parties and complexity — and address the submissions and authorities of the parties; addressing the value of the subject matter exclusively is an error of principle.
Court orders
#- 1.The Ruling of the Taxing Master dated 8th September 2023 is set aside
- 2.The party and party Bill of Costs dated 19th April 2022 is remanded for re-assessment by a different Taxing Master
- 3.Each party to bear own costs
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Rules 7 and 11 of the Advocates Remuneration Order, 2014 and Section 3A of the Civil Procedure Act (inherent jurisdiction over a reference against a Taxing Master's decision)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Kimonye v Kenya Meat Commission; Co-operative Bank Ltd (Athi River) (Garnishee) (Cause 465 of 2017) [2023] KEELRC 3024 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2023). Chamber Summons dated 14th September 2023 (Reference). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2023/3024/eng@2023-11-23
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.