Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
High CourtAllowedNotice of Motion dated 19th February 2019 (ruling delivered 20th September 2019)· [2019] KEHC 12348 (KLR)

Steven Muregi Chege t/a S.M. Chege Advocates v Hellena N. Mungai

High Court of Kenya
20 September 2019
851 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~3 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A formal Certificate of Taxation is conclusive evidence of legal fees unless you can provide documented proof of a correction or payment.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The applicant advocate, Steven Muregi Chege t/a S.M. Chege Advocates, moved the court by Notice of Motion dated 19th February 2019 under Sections 1A, 1B and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act and section 51(2) of the Advocates Act, seeking entry of judgment for taxed costs, interest from the date of taxation (2nd October 2018), and costs of the application. The respondent, Hellena N. Mungai, opposed via a replying affidavit sworn 14th May 2019, contending the application sought an erroneous sum, that the bill of costs had been rectified and taxed at Ksh 74,090 (with Ksh 292,575.20 taxed off), and that she had paid the advocate Ksh 89,000 (Ksh 40,000 cash and Ksh 49,000 by Mpesa), entitling her to a refund of Ksh 14,910. The court noted the applicant had annexed a Certificate of Taxation by Deputy Registrar S. Opande dated 22nd October 2018 for Ksh 292,575.20, while the respondent relied on a letter from the applicant's own firm confirming taxation at Ksh 74,090. Holding that there was no review or appeal against the certificate of taxation and that it could not look behind a valid, regular certificate, the court entered judgment for Ksh 292,575.20 with interest and costs, but granted the respondent a 30-day temporary stay of execution to avail proof of amendment/correction of the certificate and documentary proof of payments, failing which the judgment would proceed.

Key legal issues

#
01

Effect of a regular certificate of taxation under section 51(2) of the Advocates Act

Holding

The court cannot look behind a valid, regular certificate of taxation where no review or appeal against the taxation is shown.

Reasoning

The applicant annexed a Certificate of Taxation by the Deputy Registrar dated 22nd October 2018 for Ksh 292,575.20. The respondent asserted the bill had been rectified and taxed at Ksh 74,090, but produced no amended certificate, taxation ruling or review/appeal. The court therefore treated the certificate as conclusive and entered judgment on it, while granting a 30-day stay for the respondent to produce proof of correction or payments.

p. 2
02

Burden of proving payments made to the advocate

Holding

The respondent's assertions of payments totalling Ksh 89,000 were not conclusively proved; only Mpesa annexures and a Ksh 5,000 disbursement receipt were before the court, without highlighting the specific payments relating to legal fees.

Reasoning

The court found the respondent's replying affidavit gave a contrary view but that proof of payments other than the Mpesa annexures and the Ksh 5,000 receipt was not confirmed, nor were the specific Mpesa payments relating to legal fees highlighted. It therefore required documentary proof of actual payments as a condition attached to the stay.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • In the absence of a review or appeal against a certificate of taxation, the court must rely on the certificate as filed until an amended/corrected one is availed.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Judgment entered on the certificate of taxation of 22nd October 2018 for Ksh 292,575.20 with interest and costs of the application against the applicant
  2. 2.Temporary stay of execution for 30 days from the date of delivery of the ruling granted to the respondent to avail court order, ruling and/or proceedings confirming amendment/correction of the certificate of taxation
  3. 3.Documentary proof to be availed to court of actual payments made towards settlement of legal fees
  4. 4.In default, extension of the judgment and to proceed

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Civil Procedure Act, Cap 21Sections 1A, 1B, 3A
  • Advocates Act, Cap 16Section 51(2)
  • Advocates Remuneration OrderParagraph 11
Jurisdiction invoked
Sections 1A, 1B and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act, Cap 21 and section 51(2) of the Advocates Act, Cap 16

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Steven Muregi Chege t/a S.M. Chege Advocates v Hellena N. Mungai", Case Analysis (2019). Notice of Motion dated 19th February 2019 (ruling delivered 20th September 2019). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2019/12348/eng@2019-09-20

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