Amadi & Amadi Advocates v Monarch Insurance Company Limited

3. 3. Subsequently a certificate of taxation was issued by the Deputy Registrar Hon Thibaru in Machakos High Court on the 4th September 2025 for the above amount 4. The client /respondent has failed and or neglected to make good the said taxed costs in spite of several assurances to that effect. 5. It is therefore in the interest of justice that the other sought in this application be granted as prayed for. Parties then filed the written submissions. Applicant's Submissions. 4. They are dated 20th April 2025. It was submitted that the issue for determination by the court is whether the court should enter judgement against the respondent as per the certificate of taxation dated 4th September 2025 and whether the applicant is entitled to interest at 14% per annum from 3rd July 2024 till payment in full. 5. It was submitted that the advocate/ client bill of costs in issue here dated 28th June 2024 was taxed on 1st September 2025 and a certificate of taxation issued on 4th September 2025. The certificate of taxation was duly served upon the respondent and so far it has not been reviewed, varied and /or set aside. 6. Under section 51(2) of the Advocates Act the Court is bound to enter judgement as prayed in terms of the amount as per the certificate of taxation. 7. They relied on the cases of:High Court of Kenya at Nairobi miscellaneous civil application number 667 of 2017 Waiganjo Wachira and Company Advocates versus Pacis Insurance Company Limited (2020) eKLROwino Okeyo and Company Advocates versus Fuelex Kenya Limited (2005) eKLR 8. On whether the applicant is entitled to interest at 14% per annum, it was submitted, that the respondent was duly served in the Bill of costs and under rule 7 of the Advocates Remuneration Order, an advocate is allowed to charge interest rate of up to 14% per annum on his disbursements and costs. Respondent’s Submissions 9. They are dated 10th August 2025 10. Basically, they were objections to items which are on the applicant's bill of costs dated 28th June 2025. They asked the court to tax the bill at Ksh 69,050. They relied on the case of Republic versus Minister of Agriculture and others experte Samuel Muchiri W’njuguna and 6 others (2006) eKLR. Legal Analysis 11. Section 51(2) of the Advocates Act stipulates 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 course recovered thereby; and the court may make such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit, including where the retainer is not disputed, an order that judgement be entered for the sum certified to be due with costs.” 12. Therefore, 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 determination made and not set aside and /or altered, no other action would be required for the court save to enter judgement. https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/12402/eng@2026-07-21 2

page 2 of 3

13. In the present case, the objections raised on the applicant's bill of costs in the respondent's submissions are being raised too late in the day and in the wrong forum. They should have been raised during the taxation of the Bill. The applicant is entitled to judgement in terms of the certificate of costs and interest. 14. A view of the above the applicant's notice of motion dated 24th September 2025 is merited and hereby allowed. DATED AND DELIVERED AT KERUGOYA THIS 21ST JULY 2026 IN THE PRESENCE OF: BEFORE LADY JUSTICE JOYCE GANDANi No appearance by either party Court Assistant Ben https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/12402/eng@2026-07-21 3

page 3 of 3