Dennis Anyoka Moturi & Company Advocates v Susan Nduta Kimani

judgment/Decree of this Honourable Court. 3. THAT interest at Court rates be awarded on the said taxed costs from the date of taxation until payment in full. 4. THAT the costs of this application be provided for. 2. The application is based on the grounds appearing on its face together with the supporting affidavit of Dennis Anyoka Moturi, sworn on even date. THE APPLICANT’S CASE 3. The deponent averred that the Respondent instructed his firm to represent her in Civil Case No. 293 of 2019. He further averred that, after the matter was concluded, he filed a Bill of Costs dated 14th November 2022, which was taxed on 24th February 2026. Subsequently, a Certificate of Taxation was issued on 2nd June 2026 for Kshs 305,449.60/. He argued that the Respondent has failed to pay this amount. 4. He stated that the Certificate of Taxation has neither been set aside nor varied. In conclusion, he urged the Court to allow the application as prayed. 5. Though duly served, the Respondent did not file any response to the application. ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION

page 2 of 5

6. Having considered the application and the respective affidavits, the only issue for determination is whether judgment should be entered in favour of the Advocate/Applicant in accordance with the Certificate of Costs. 7. Section 51(2) of the Advocates Act provides as follows: a. The certificate of the taxing officer by whom any bill has been taxed shall, unless it is set aside or altered by the Court, be final as to the amount of the costs covered thereby, and the Court may make such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit, including, in a case where the retainer is not disputed, an order that judgment be entered for the sum certified to be due with costs.” 8. In Lubulellah & Associates Advocates v N.K. Brothers Limited [2014] eKLR, the Court held that: “The law is very clear that once a taxing master has taxed the costs, issued a Certificate of costs and there is no reference against his ruling or there has been a ruling and a determination made and not set aside and/or altered, no other action would be required from the court save to enter judgment. An applicant is not required to file suit for the recovery of costs.” 9. It is settled law that a Certificate of Taxation is conclusive evidence of the amount due and payable unless set aside or

page 3 of 5

varied. In the matter at hand, the Applicant's Bill of Costs was duly taxed on 24th February 2026. A Certificate of Taxation was issued for Kshs. 305,449.60/-, and as matters stand, it has not been set aside or varied. Accordingly, I find no reason to deny the Applicant the judgment sought. 10. Regarding interest, Rule 7 of the Advocates Remuneration Order provides that: “An Advocate may charge interest at 14% per annum on his disbursements and costs, whether by scale or otherwise, from the expiration of one month from the delivery of his bill to the client, provided such claim for interest is raised before the amount of the bill has been paid or tendered in full” 11. In Kerongo & Company Advocates vs Africa Assurance Merchant Co. Ltd (2019) eKLR, the Court held that: “An Advocate who does not provide proof that he had raised the issue of interest before the amount in the Bill of Costs has been paid or tendered in full will not be paid the interest chargeable under Rule 7 of the Advocates Remuneration. 12. The Applicant has not demonstrated that they raised the issue of interest and therefore cannot be awarded interest at 14% per annum. The upshot of the foregoing is

page 4 of 5

that the application dated 5th June 2026 is merited and is hereby allowed on the following terms: i. Judgment is entered in favour of the Applicant against the Respondent for the sum of Kshs. 305,449.60/=. ii. The Advocate/Applicant is awarded costs of the application. RULING SIGNED, DATED, AND DELIVERED VIA MICROSOFT TEAMS THIS 25TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026. ……………………………………. HON. T. MURIGI JUDGE IN THE PRESENCE OF: In the absence of the parties

page 5 of 5