SheriaNet for Android — search and read Kenyan case law from your phone, offline.
Join the beta →

Namai v National Bank of Kenya Limited (Petition E039 of 2023) [2024] KEELRC 2528 (KLR) (18 October 2024) (Ruling)

[2024] KEELRC 2528 (KLR) Employment & Labour Relations Court
Read PDF
Court
Employment & Labour Relations Court
Case number
2528
Citation
[2024] KEELRC 2528 (KLR)
Decided
18 October 2024
Beta Machine-generated summary. Automatically produced by AI from the judgment text — it may be incomplete or inaccurate. Always verify against the full judgment below. Not legal advice.

Summary at a glance

TypeCosts AppealPostureAppeal from a decision of the Taxing OfficerCoramBYRAM ONGAYA
The decision of the Taxing Officer is set aside, and the costs are to be re-taxed considering the submissions and applicable law.

Facts

The petitioner (Vincent Namai) was awarded Kshs. 5,000,000 in a judgment on June 22, 2023. The respondent (National Bank of Kenya Limited) filed a Bill of Costs on April 19, 2024, claiming Kshs. 1,682,385. The Taxing Officer taxed the costs at Kshs. 382,385 on August 26, 2024.

Issues

  • The validity of the Taxing Officer's decision to tax costs at Kshs. 382,385
  • The adequacy of the Taxing Officer's explanation for the cost award

Reasoning

The court found the Taxing Officer's decision to tax costs at Kshs. 382,385 to be inadequate and not explained sufficiently.

Outcome

The application is granted.

Orders

  • The decision of the Taxing Officer is set aside.
  • The bill of costs is to be re-taxed.
  • The respondent is to pay the costs of the application.

Remedies

  • Re-taxing of the bill of costs

Authorities cited

Legislation (3)
  • Employment and Labour Relations Court Act
  • Employment Act, 2007
  • Fair Administrative Actions Act
⚠ This summary is experimental and generated by a language model, not a lawyer. It can contain errors, omissions, or misinterpretations and must not be relied on for legal decisions. The authoritative source is the full judgment. Please confirm every point against the original before use.
Full judgment 0.2 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case