Munyasya v Kenya National Union of Teachers & another (Employment and Labour Relations Cause E457 of 2023) [2025] KEELRC 1936 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Employment Court set aside a Taxing Master's ruling because it used the wrong fee scale and gave no reasons for the instruction fee awarded.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether invocation of paragraph 58 of the Advocates Remuneration Order constituted an error of principle
It did. No monetary award was made in the primary suit and the relief granted (striking out the suit for prematurity) was such that neither party recovered sums within the magistrate's court jurisdiction, so the subordinate court scale was wrongly applied.
Paragraph 58 permits the subordinate court scale only where the amount recovered or the relief awarded could fall within a subordinate court's jurisdiction. Here the primary suit, an ELRC matter challenging a suspension, yielded no monetary award and was struck out; nothing was recovered. Applying the subordinate scale in those circumstances was therefore a wrong principle vitiating the taxation.
Whether the award of Kshs. 75,000.00 instruction fees was justified
It was not. The Taxing Master's ruling gave no criteria or circumstances for fixing instruction fees at Kshs. 75,000.00 against a claim of Kshs. 2,500,000.00, amounting to an arbitrary exercise of discretion.
While a Taxing Master may fix instruction fees where the value of the subject matter is not discernible from the pleadings or judgment, the discretion must be exercised judiciously. The ruling only stated 'all circumstances considered' without identifying them, so parties cannot perceive the basis of the decision, which the authorities require.
Legal principles established
#- A court will not interfere with a Taxing Master's discretion unless an error of principle is demonstrated; where the sum awarded is manifestly excessive or the fees are arrived at on wrong principles, an error of principle can be inferred and the award set aside.
- The subordinate court scale under paragraph 58 of the Advocates Remuneration Order applies only where the amount recovered or the relief granted falls within the jurisdiction of a subordinate court; otherwise its application is an error of principle.
- A Taxing Master's discretion to fix instruction fees where the value of the subject matter cannot be discerned must be exercised judiciously, not arbitrarily, and the criteria for the figure awarded must be disclosed.
Court orders
#- 1.The Taxation Ruling dated July 8, 2024 is set aside
- 2.The matter is remitted to another Taxing Master for fresh taxation
- 3.Each party to bear own costs for the Reference
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Reference against a Taxing Master's decision under the Advocates Remuneration Order, entertained by the ELRC as the court of equal status in which the primary suit was filed
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Munyasya v Kenya National Union of Teachers & another (Employment and Labour Relations Cause E457 of 2023) [2025] KEELRC 1936 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in the judgment as provided. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/1936/eng@2025-06-30
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.