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

ODHIAMBO OWITI AND COMPANY V BLUESHIELD INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED [2007] KEHC 14 (KLR)

[2007] KEHC 14 (KLR) High Court of Kenya
Read PDF
Court
High Court of Kenya
Case number
14
Citation
[2007] KEHC 14 (KLR)
Decided
27 May 2007
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeMiscellaneous Civil ApplicationPostureApplicant seeks leave to have its 110 bills of costs listed and taxed between it and its client, the respondent.CoramJ. W. MWERA
Holding

The court dismisses the application with costs, stating that the advocate cannot seek leave to tax a bill with the client after ceasing to act for that client and that the advocate cannot consolidate 110 bills in one application.

Facts

The applicant, a firm of advocates, sought leave to have its 110 bills of costs listed and taxed between it and the respondent, Blueshield Insurance Company Limited. The respondent opposed the motion, citing jurisdictional doubts and the inability to seek leave to tax bills and have certificates of costs deemed decrees.

Issues

  1. Whether the court has jurisdiction to entertain the advocates' motion.
  2. Whether the advocate can seek leave to tax bills and have certificates of costs deemed decrees.
  3. Whether the applicant can consolidate 110 bills in one application.
  4. Whether the advocate can seek leave to tax a bill with the client after ceasing to act for that client.

Reasoning

The court found that the advocate cannot seek leave to tax a bill with the client after ceasing to act for that client and that the advocate cannot consolidate 110 bills in one application. The court also noted that the advocate cannot seek leave to tax bills and have certificates of costs deemed decrees.

Outcome

The application is dismissed with costs.

Authorities cited

Legislation (4)
  • Advocates (Remuneration) Order
  • Advocates Act (Cap 16)
  • Civil Procedure Rules
  • Civil Procedure Act
Cases cited (1)
  • Sharma versus Uhuru Highway Development Limited {2001} EA 530
Experimental AI summary generated by a language model, not a lawyer. It may contain errors or omissions and must not be relied on for legal decisions — the full judgment below is the authoritative source.
Full judgment 0.1 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case