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

EVANS THIGA GATURU v APEX SECURITY LTD [2011] KEHC 889 (KLR)

[2011] KEHC 889 (KLR) High Court of Kenya
Read PDF
Court
High Court of Kenya
Case number
889
Citation
[2011] KEHC 889 (KLR)
Decided
4 February 2011
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeAdvocates' RemunerationPostureApplication for orders for payment of fees and interestCoramL NJAGI
Holding

The court granted the application, ordering the Respondent to pay the sum of Kshs 376,833/- to the Applicant, together with interest at 14% per annum from 11th April, 2010, until payment in full, and the costs of the application.

Facts

The Applicant, Advocate Evans Thiga Gaturu, applied for orders that judgment be entered in his favor against the Respondent, Apex Security Ltd, for the sum of Kshs 376,833/- together with interest and costs. The Applicant claimed he was entitled to interest at 14% per annum from 11th April, 2010, until payment in full, based on the issuance of a Certificate of Taxation and the Respondent's failure to pay the fees.

Issues

  1. Advocate's entitlement to interest on fees
  2. Respondent's obligation to pay fees and interest

Reasoning

The court found that the Respondent had been notified of the Certificate of Taxation and had not paid the fees, thus the Advocate was entitled to interest and the court ordered payment.

Outcome

In favor of the Applicant

Orders

  • Judgment in favor of the Applicant for the sum of Kshs 376,833/-
  • Interest at 14% per annum from 11th April, 2010, until payment in full
  • Costs of the application

Remedies

  • Payment of Kshs 376,833/-
  • Interest on Kshs 376,833/-

Authorities cited

Legislation (3)
  • Advocates Act
  • Advocates (Remuneration) Rules
  • Civil Procedure Act
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