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

Mwangi Keng'ara & Company Advocates v Zipporah Mungai

Mwangi Keng'ara & Company Advocates v Mungai (Miscellaneous Application E355 of 2021) [2026] KEHC 10890 (KLR) (Commercial and Tax) (16 July 2026) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2026] KEHC 10890 (KLR) REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT NAIROBI (MILIMANI COMMERCIAL COURTS) COMMERCIAL AND TAX MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION E355 OF 2021 BK NJOROGE, J JULY 16, 2026 BETWEEN MWANGI KENG'ARA & COMPANY ADVOCATES ......................... APPLICANT AND ZIPPORAH MUNGAI ..................................................................................... CLIENT RULING 1. 2. The Applicant filed the Notice of Motion dated 26th November, 2024 seeking the following orders: a. That this Honourable Court be pleased to enter Judgement in favour of the Advocate/Applicant for the taxed costs of Kshs. 271,764.48 per the Certificate of Taxation issued herein, dated 28/11/2023. b. That interest be awarded to the Advocate/Applicant on the sum Kshs. 271,764.48/= at the rate of 14% per annum cents (sic) with effect from 23/06/2021 to 7/12/2023, totaling to Kshs. 66,888.74 cents. c. That the costs of this Application be awarded to the Advocate/Applicant. The Application was supported by the affidavit of Mercy Nduta Mwangi. She stated that the Applicant filed an Advocate/Client Bill of Costs dated 13th May, 2021, which was taxed at Kshs. 271,764.48 on 21st November, 2023. A Certificate of Taxation was subsequently issued on 28th November, 2023. The Applicant thereafter issued a notice to levy interest on the unpaid legal fees at the rate of 14% per annum pursuant to Rule 7 of the Advocates Remuneration (Amendment) Order, 2017. This notice was contained in the Advocate/Client Bill of Costs and served upon the Respondent on 24th May, 2021. https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/10890/eng@2026-07-16 1

page 1 of 4

3. The Applicant further contended that the total legal fees claimed in the Advocate/Client Bill of Costs dated 13th May, 2021 amounted to Kshs. 268,162.48. The amount had accrued interest as at 7th December, 2023 amounting to Kshs. 66,888.74. This is the sum which is claimed from the Respondent. The Applicant further asserts that it was deprived of the use and benefit of the unpaid legal fees for a period exceeding three years. That it is therefore entitled to compensation by way of interest at the rate of 14% per annum as provided by law. 4. There was no response to this Application. Issues for Determination 5. The Court has considered the Application and the issues for determination are: a. Whether the Court ought to enter judgment in the sum in the Certificate of Costs for the sum of Kshs. 271,764.48. b. Whether the Applicant is entitled to interest. Analysis 6. The Applicant seeks Judgement for the taxed costs of Kshs. 271,764.48 as per the Certificate of Taxation issued herein, dated 28th November, 2023. a) Whether the Court Ought to Enter Judgment in the Sum in the Certificate of Costs for the sum of Kshs.271,764.48. 7. The applicable law is found at Section 51(2) of the Advocates Act which reads as follows; “ 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. The above-mentioned provision was reiterated in the case of Musyoka & Wambua Advocates versus Rustam Hira Advocate (2006) eKLR where it was held: “ 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......” 9. In the instant case, no reference has been filed challenging the Certificate of Taxation which is sought to be adopted as judgment on costs. There is no issue that has been raised as to the retainer. This Court is therefore satisfied that the Certificate of Taxation dated 28th November 2023 is uncontested. 10. Going by the above-mentioned provision of Section 51(2) of the Advocate’s Act, the Court enters judgment in the sum in the Certificate of Costs dated 28th November, 2023 for the sum of Kshs. 271,764.48. https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/10890/eng@2026-07-16 2

page 2 of 4

b) Whether the Applicant is Entitled to Interest. 11. On the issue of interest, the Applicant sought interest at the rate of 14% per annum with effect from 23rd June, 2021 to 7th December 2023, totaling to Kshs.66,888.74. 12. Rule 7 of the Advocates Remuneration Order states: 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. 13. The Court in Jackson Omwenga & Co. Advocates vs. Everest Enterprises Ltd [2017] stated; “ I have perused the Advocates Remuneration (Amendment) Order, Rule 7. Under the said rule, an advocate can only charge interest from the expiration of one month from the delivery of the bill to the client, providing such claim for interest is raised before the amount of the bill has been paid or tendered in full. To comply with that provision, the applicant must prove two things: 14. a. That one month has expired from the time he delivered his bill to the client; b. He has raised his ‘claim’ for interest before the amount of the billhas been paid or tendered in full.” From a perusal of the record, the notice to levy interest on the unpaid Legal fees at the rate of 14% per annum was issued to the Respondent through the Advocate/Client Bill of Costs dated 13th May, 2021. “ Take Notice that the Advocate demands payment of interest of the due fees at the rate of 14% per annum on expiry of 30 days after service of this bill of costs in accordance with paragraph 7 of the ARO." (page 3 of the Advocate/Client Bill of costs) 15. Therefore, in line with Rule 7, the Applicant is found to have furnished proof that it had raised the claim for interest with the Respondent. 16. The Application is hereby allowed as prayed. 17. As to costs the same lie at the discretion of this Court and ordinarily follow the event. The same are awarded to the Advocate/Applicant and assessed at Kshs. 50,000/=. Determination 18. The Advocate/Applicant’s application by way of a Notice of Motion dated 26th November, 2024 is allowed in the following terms: 1. That this Honourable Court Hereby enters Judgement in favour of the Advocate/Applicant for the taxed costs of Kshs. 271,764.48 as per the Certificate of Taxation issued herein, dated 28/11/2023. 2. That interest is Hereby awarded to the Advocate/Applicant on the sum Kshs. 271,764.48/= at the rate of 14% per annum with effect from 23/06/2021 to 7/12/2023, totaling to Kshs.66,888.74. https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/10890/eng@2026-07-16 3

page 3 of 4

3. 19. That the costs of this Application are Hereby awarded to the Advocate/ Applicant, assessed at Kshs. 50,000/=. It is so ordered. DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT MILIMANI THIS 16TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 NJOROGE BENJAMIN K. JUDGE In the presence of: N/A for the Advocate/Applicant. N/A for the Client/Respondent. Mr. John Paul - Court Assistant https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/10890/eng@2026-07-16 4

page 4 of 4

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.