Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCPartially AllowedNot stated in judgment· [2024] KEELRC 522 (KLR)

Konosi t/a Konosi & Co Advocates v Musimoto Motor Company Ltd (Miscellaneous Application E002 of 2023) [2024] KEELRC 522 (KLR)

High Court of Kenya
7 March 2024
469 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~2 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan court confirmed that clients must pay taxed advocate fees with interest from the taxation date, not earlier.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The applicant, an advocate of the High Court, moved the court by notice of motion dated 20th November, 2023 under section 51(2) of the Advocates Act, section 27(2) of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 51 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules, seeking judgment against the respondent client for Kshs 252,918.40 as certified in a certificate of costs dated 14th November, 2023 and issued on 20th November, 2023, together with interest at 14% from 24th July, 2022, a decree and liberty to execute, and costs of the application. The application was supported by the affidavit of Lilian Trufosa Ekesa, Advocate. When the application came up for hearing on 13th December, 2023, the respondent was granted 14 days to respond but filed no response. The court noted that the advocate/client bill of costs dated 19th January, 2023 had been taxed by consent of counsel for both parties at Kshs 252,918.40 on 14th November, 2023; no appeal or reference was filed against the taxation, and despite demand letters, the respondent made no payment or settlement proposal. Holding that there was no legal or other reason to deny the applicant the fruits of the consent and resultant taxation, the court allowed the application as prayed. It entered judgment for Kshs 252,918.40, but awarded interest at 14% only from the date of taxation, 14th November, 2023, when the amount became due and payable, rather than from 24th July, 2022 as sought. A decree was to issue with liberty to execute, and the applicant was awarded costs of the application assessed at Kshs 15,000/=.

Key legal issues

#
01

Entitlement to judgment on a consented certificate of costs under section 51(2) of the Advocates Act

Holding

Judgment was entered for the applicant as prayed since the costs were taxed by consent, no appeal or reference was filed, and the respondent made no payment or settlement proposal

Reasoning

The bill of costs dated 19th January, 2023 was taxed by consent of both counsel at Kshs 252,918.40 on 14th November, 2023 and a certificate issued on 20th November, 2023. The respondent was granted 14 days to respond to the application but filed nothing. Demand letters were exhibited and no payments, actions or settlement proposals were made. The court found no legal or other reason to deny the applicant the fruits of the consent taxation.

p. 2
02

Date from which interest at 14% runs on taxed costs

Holding

Interest runs from the date of taxation (14th November, 2023), not from 24th July, 2022 as sought

Reasoning

Although the applicant sought interest from 24th July, 2022, the court held that the taxed amount became due and payable on the date of taxation, 14th November, 2023, and interest at 14% runs from that date.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • Where costs are taxed by consent and no appeal or reference is filed, the advocate is entitled to judgment on the certificate of costs with interest from the date of taxation

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Judgment entered for the applicant against the respondent in the sum of Kshs 252,918.40 as per the certificate of costs dated 14th November, 2023
  2. 2.Interest at 14% on the taxed amount from 14th November, 2023 until payment in full
  3. 3.A decree to issue in respect of the certificate of costs, with liberty to execute
  4. 4.Costs of the application awarded to the applicant, assessed at Kshs 15,000/=

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Advocates Actsection 51(2)
  • Civil Procedure Actsection 27(2)
  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 51 rule 1
Jurisdiction invoked
Section 51(2) of the Advocates Act, section 27(2) of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 51 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Konosi t/a Konosi & Co Advocates v Musimoto Motor Company Ltd (Miscellaneous Application E002 of 2023) [2024] KEELRC 522 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2024). Not stated in judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2024/522/eng@2024-03-07

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