Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Original judgment

Agn Kamau Advocates v Daniel Carling (suing As Administrator of The Estate of Mona Ingegard Bjorklund)

AGN Kamau Advocates v Carling (Suing as administrator of the Estate of Mona Ingegard Bjorklund) (Miscellaneous Application E047 of 2022) [2025] KEHC 18172 (KLR) (Family) (5 December 2025) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2025] KEHC 18172 (KLR) REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT NAIROBI (MILIMANI LAW COURTS) FAMILY MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION E047 OF 2022 H NAMISI, J DECEMBER 5, 2025 BETWEEN AGN KAMAU ADVOCATES .................................................................. APPLICANT AND DANIEL CARLING (SUING AS ADMINISTRATOR OF THE ESTATE OF MONA INGEGARD BJORKLUND) ................................................. RESPONDENT RULING 1. The Applicant’s Notice of Motion dated 5 November 2024 seeks the following orders: i. Spent; ii. That the Honourable Court be pleased to enter judgement for the Applicant against the Respondent for the sum of Kshs 908,936/= as appears on the Certificate of Taxation dated 11 October 2023 with interest from the date of the said Certificate of Taxation until payment in full; iii. That the Applicant be allowed to execute the judgement herein against the Respondent; iv. That the costs of this Application be borne by the Respondent 2. The Application is supported by the Affidavit of Allan George Njogu Kamau, Advocate. The Advocate/Client Bill of Costs filed on 9 February 2022 was taxed in the sum of Kshs 908,936/= and a Certificate of Taxation dated 10 October 2023 subsequently issued. No appeal has been filed against the said Certificate. 3. The Respondent did not participate in the Application. https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2025/18172/eng@2025-12-05 1

page 1 of 2

4. In the case of Musyoka & Wambua Advocates v Rustam Hira Advocate (2006) eKLR it was held thus: “ Section 51 of the Act makes general provisions as to taxation, as the marginal note indicates. One of those provisions is that the court has discretion to enter judgment on a Certificate of Taxation which has not been set aside or altered, where there is no dispute as to retainer. This in my view is a mode of recovery of taxed costs provided by law, in addition to filing of suit.....” 5. Having read the Application and Supporting Affidavit, I am of the considered view that the same is merited. The Application is allowed and I make the following orders: i. Judgement is hereby entered for the Applicant against the Respondent in terms of the Certificate of Costs dated 10 October 2023 for Kshs 908,936/=. ii. Interest thereon is awarded at the rate of 14% per annum from 10 October 2023 until payment in full. iii. The Applicant is awarded costs assessed at Kshs 30,000/=. DATED AND DELIVERED AT NAIROBI THIS 5 DAY OF DECEMBER 2025 HELENE R. NAMISI JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT Delivered on virtual platform in the presence of: For Applicant: N/A For the Respondent: N/A Court Assistant: Lucy Mwangi https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2025/18172/eng@2025-12-05 2

page 2 of 2

A note on accuracy. These pages are generated automatically from our AI-written case briefs and have not been checked by a lawyer. Case titles and citations come from Kenya Law; the counts, topics, propositions and “treatment” labels are derived from the briefs and can be incomplete or wrong. Use them as a research aid and always read the original judgment before relying on anything here. This is not legal advice.