Kiruki & Kayika & Co Advocates v Monarch Insurance Co Ltd

4. a. Whether the application is merited to warrant his court adopt the Certificate of Taxation and enter Judgment in the sum of Kshs.99,932/- being certified costs in favour of the Applicant as against the Respondent. b. Whether the Applicant is entitled to interest on the taxed costs from the date of filing this application until full settlement of this matter. c. Whether the Applicant is entitled to costs of the application. The application has been brought under the provisions of Section 51(a) of the Advocates Act, Cap 16 Lows of Kenya. Section 51(a) provides that:“ General provisions as to taxation 1. 5. Every application for an order for the taxation of an advocate’s bill or for the delivery of such a bill and the delivering up of any deeds, documents and papers by an advocate shall be made in the matter of that advocate. It is trite law that once the Taxing Officer taxes costs and issues a Certificate of Taxation but no reference is filed by the opposing party seeking to have it set aside or even altered it, then this Court’s duty against it/him/her would be to enter Judgment in terms of the Certificate. On this, the court is also guided by the decision in the case of Lubulellah & Associates, Advocates v N. K. Brothers Limited [2014] eKLR, where the Court stated as follows:“ 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. The certificate of costs is final as to the amounts of the costs and the court would be quite in order to enter Judgment in favour of the Applicant against the Respondent herein for the taxed sum indicated in the Certificate of Taxation that was issued on 25th November 2012.” 6. In the instant case, the Applicant has stated that her firm represented the Respondent but it has failed to pay her legal fees. The Applicant then filed a Bill of Costs and vide a Ruling dated 25th July, 2025, the Deputy Registrar assessed the same at Kshs. 99,932/= /= and a certificate of Taxation was issued to that effect. The Respondent has not moved the court by filing a Reference against this ruling and neither has the ruling been set aside, altered, varied and or reviewed nor has any appeal been filed to challenge the same. 7. In the circumstances, the Court is left with only one option, which is to enter Judgment for the Applicant as prayed against the Respondent. 8. The other issue for determination is with regard to whether interest is applicable and payable. Rule 7 of the Advocates Remuneration Order provides that:- 7. Interest may be charged An advocate may charge interest at 14 per cent 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 that such claim for interest is raised before the amount of the bill shall have been paid or tendered in full. https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2025/19281/eng@2025-10-23 2

page 2 of 3

9. A reading of this rule clearly confirms that such a claim of interest must by raised after the expiration of one month from the delivery of the Bill to the client. 10. I have carefully read through the record and established that there is no claim for interest raised in the Notice of Taxation dated 6th September, 2023 or in any other document except the application. Therefore, pursuant to this rule, it is clear that the Applicant has furnished evidence to show that they raised the claim for interest with the Respondent in the application before the amount of the bill is paid. 11. In the resultant, the Court finds that the application herein has met the legal threshold required for the orders sought to issue and proceeds to order that :a. That Judgment be and is hereby entered in favour of the Applicant against the Respondent for the sum of Kenya Shillings Ninety Nine Thousand Nine Hundred and Thirty Two (Kshs. 99,932/=) being the assessed costs due to the Applicant as against the Respondent. b. The Respondent to pay interest on the taxed sum from the date of filing this application until settlement in full. c. The costs of this application to be borne by the Respondent. It is so ordered. RULING DELIVERED VIRTUALLY, DATED AND SIGNED AT KIAMBU THIS 23RD DAY OF OCTOBER , 2025. D. O. CHEPKWONY JUDGE In the presence of: Mr. Kamau Muriuki counsel for Applicant M/S Muchemi counsel for the Respondent Court Assistant – Martin/Sakina https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2025/19281/eng@2025-10-23 3

page 3 of 3