Akide & Company Advocates v Kenindia Assurance Company Limited [2017] KEHC 3941 (KLR)
- Court
- High Court of Kenya
- Case number
- 3941
- Citation
- [2017] KEHC 3941 (KLR)
- Decided
- 24 July 2017
AI Summary
Beta
Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeCosts DismissalPostureAppeal from a Taxing Master's decision to strike out Bills of Costs
Holding
The Bills of Costs are time-barred and are struck out with costs to the Respondent
Facts
Akide & Company Advocates filed Bills of Costs in four Miscellaneous Civil Applications against Kenindia Assurance Company Limited for professional services rendered. The Respondents argued that the Bills were time-barred under the Limitation of Actions Act.
Issues
- Whether the Bills of Costs are time-barred by operation of the Limitation of Actions Act
- Whether the taxing master had jurisdiction to dismiss the Bills of Costs
Reasoning
The court held that the limitation period began to run upon judgment being rendered in the primary suits, and the Bills of Costs are statute barred under Section 4(1)(a) of the Limitation of Actions Act.
Outcome
The Bills of Costs are struck out with costs to the Respondent
Orders
- The Bills of Costs are struck out
Authorities cited
Legislation (1)
- Limitation of Actions Act
Cases cited (6)
- HCC Miscellaneous Application 527 of 2011 Abincha & Co. Advocates v Trident Insurance Company Limited [2011] eKLR
- Halsbury’s Laws of England 4th Edition Volume 28 paragraph 879
- SPMCC 523 of 2004
- SPMCC 264 of 2006
- SPMCC 1068 of 2003
- SPMCC 645 of 2002
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.
Loading judgment…