Civil Division v Kenya Alliance Insurance Company Limited

[2] The application was premised on the grounds that the applicant was issued with a Certificate of Costs arising from services rendered by the applicants on behalf of the respondent in Kapsabet Principal Magistrates Civil Case No. 5 of 2015: Christine Rutto (suing on her on behalf and on behalf of the dependants of the estate of Christopher Kibitok v Mayfair Holdings Limited. The applicant further averred that the certified costs due to them per the Certificate dated 6 th August 2025 have neither been settled nor set aside through an order of the Court; and that there is no dispute on the retainer between the parties, yet the respondent has declined to settle the same in spite of demand. [3] The application was supported by the affidavit sworn by Pinto Nelson Atudo, Advocate, sworn on the 5th September 2025 to which the applicant annexed the following documents, among others: [a] The Fee Note dated 22nd April 2016; [b] The Notice of Election issued under Paragraph 22 of the Advocates (Remuneration) Order; [c] The Certificate of Costs for Kshs. 241,899/= dated 6 th August 2025. [4] Although the application was duly served on the respondent, it neither filed a response nor attended court on for hearing. Section 51(2) of the Advocates Act, states that: 2|Page HCCCMISC. NO E003 OF 2023 RULING

page 2 of 5

“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.” [5] Hence, in Lubulellah & Associates Advocates v N K Brothers Limited [2014] eKLR it was 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. 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] Having considered the application together with its supporting affidavit and the documents annexed thereto, I find it meritorious, save that, although the applicant claimed interest from 5th April 2016, no justification was made for this prayer. Paragraph 7 of the Advocates (Remuneration) Order provides that: 3|Page HCCCMISC. NO E003 OF 2023 RULING

page 3 of 5

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. [7] In this case the applicant opted to file a Bill of Costs for Taxation. Accordingly, interest is only chargeable from the date of issuance of the Certificate of Costs when the amount due was ascertained and certified as payable by the client. [8] Accordingly, the application dated 5 th September 2025 is hereby allowed and orders granted as follows: [a] Judgment be and is hereby entered in the Applicant’s favour in the sum of Kshs. 241,899/= together with interest at 14% with effect from the 6th August 2025 until payment in full. [b] Costs of the application be and are hereby awarded to the applicant. It is so ordered. DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED VIRTUALLY AT KAPSABET THIS 7TH DAY OF JULY 2026. ……………..………..…………………. HON. OLGA SEWE 4|Page HCCCMISC. NO E003 OF 2023 RULING

page 4 of 5

JUDGE 5|Page HCCCMISC. NO E003 OF 2023 RULING

page 5 of 5