1. I have considered the application dated 13th October 2022 together with the affidavit in support and the replying affidavit sworn in opposition to the same dated 24th October 2022.
2. The applicant submitted that the taxing officer breached the relevant rules in reaching her decision.
3. I note from the outset however, that Counsel filed this matter in a different suit from the original one. To my mind the proceedings therefore offend Section 34(1) of the Civil Procedure Act which states that all questions arising in relation to a decree shall be determined by the court executing the decree and not by a separate suit.
4. Upon Inquiry by the court, Counsel for the applicant could not say with certainty if leave had been sought by the applicant from the court as is required pursuant to Rule 11 of the Advocates Act. Nor could Counsel state whether or not the same procedure had been complied with prior to filing the present application.
5. Based on the reasons above, I find that the application is incompetently before me and the same is stuck out with costs.
2. The applicant submitted that the taxing officer breached the relevant rules in reaching her decision.
3. I note from the outset however, that Counsel filed this matter in a different suit from the original one. To my mind the proceedings therefore offend Section 34(1) of the Civil Procedure Act which states that all questions arising in relation to a decree shall be determined by the court executing the decree and not by a separate suit.
4. Upon Inquiry by the court, Counsel for the applicant could not say with certainty if leave had been sought by the applicant from the court as is required pursuant to Rule 11 of the Advocates Act. Nor could Counsel state whether or not the same procedure had been complied with prior to filing the present application.
5. Based on the reasons above, I find that the application is incompetently before me and the same is stuck out with costs.