Association of Local Government Workers Union v Kenya County Government Workers Union; Kenya County Government Workers Union (Formerly Kenya Local Government Workers Union) (Client); Mbuvi t/a Katunga Mbuvi & Co Advocates (Advocate) (Miscellaneous Application E244 of 2021) [2024] KEELRC 828 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Employment Court threw out a Kshs 1 million fee award as excessive and barred an advocate from contradicting his own earlier position on the same fees.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Error of principle in enhancement of instruction fees
The enhancement of instruction fees from Kshs 3,500 to Kshs 1,000,000 without adequate justification constituted an error of principle warranting interference
The court accepted the Client's argument, supported by authorities such as Ngatia & Associates and Odera Obar, that a tax award enhanced by a factor far exceeding ten times the statutory base, without the Taxing Officer assigning reasons, is manifestly excessive and justifies interference. The matter was not shown to be novel or complex to justify the multiplication.
Failure to account for advance payments
Failure to appropriate advance payments of Kshs 900,000 against the taxed fees would unjustly enrich the Advocate
The Client contended, relying on Alutala Mukhwana, that the Taxing Officer failed to take into account advance payments admittedly received by the Advocate. The court found the grounds of the Client's reference valid, and remitted the Bill for re-taxation before a different Taxing Officer.
Advocate's reference as abuse of process
The Advocate's reference was disallowed as an afterthought and abuse of court process
The Advocate had, in his replying affidavit opposing the Client's reference, endorsed the Taxing Officer's award as reasonable and fair. Having adopted that position, he could not later seek to set aside the same award; that amounted to approbation and reprobation, an abuse of court process.
Legal principles established
#- A party cannot approbate and reprobate - supporting a taxing decision in one application and seeking to set it aside in another amounts to abuse of court process
- A court may interfere with a taxing officer's award where the enhancement over the statutory base is manifestly excessive and unexplained
Court orders
#- 1.The Client's reference is allowed
- 2.The Advocate's reference is disallowed
- 3.The Bill of Costs is remitted for re-taxation by another Taxing Officer other than Hon Fredrick M. Nyamora
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Reference under Paragraph 11 of the Advocates Remuneration Order against the decision of the Taxing Officer
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Association of Local Government Workers Union v Kenya County Government Workers Union; Kenya County Government Workers Union (Formerly Kenya Local Government Workers Union) (Client); Mbuvi t/a Katunga Mbuvi & Co Advocates (Advocate) (Miscellaneous Application E244 of 2021) [2024] KEELRC 828 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2024). Misc Application No E244 of 2021. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2024/828/eng@2024-04-04
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.