1. This Ruling determines the Applicants’ Notice of Motion dated 26/05/2026 seeking entry of Judgment on the Certificate of Taxation issued in this matter after taxation of a Bill of Costs.
2. There is no dispute that the Advocate/Client Bill of Costs dated 8/02/2023 was indeed taxed on 13/03/2026 by the Deputy Registrar of this Court, sitting as the Taxing Officer, at the sum of Kshs 5,077,593.20 as appears from the Certificate of Taxation dated 28/04/2026. I understand the Bill of Costs to have been for services rendered by the Advocates in respect to preparation, registration and perfection of a debenture to secure a financial facility.
3. I also note that the Client’s Application seeking striking out of the Bill of Costs on the ground of absence of a Retainer (Advocate-Client relationship) was dismissed on 14/11/2024 by W . Mongare J for non-attendance and/or want of prosecution, and upon the Client filing another Application seeking reinstatement of the earlier Application, the Application for reinstatement was allowed but the earlier Application still dismissed though this time on merits. It is under these circumstances therefore that the Bill of Costs proceeded to taxation.
4. The Advocates have now, in accordance with the provisions of Section 51(2) of the Advocates Act, Paragraph 7 of the Advocates Remuneration Order , moved this Court seeking entry of Judgment for the taxed amount, together with interest at the rate of 14% per annum from 27/03/2023, being a date one month after service upon the Client of the Bill of Costs.
5. In his Supporting Affidavit, Eric Thuge Muchiri , who introduced himself as an Advocate practicing in the Applicant law firm as a Partner, deponed that the Advocates now wish to move to execute the taxed costs hence need for the entry of Judgment. He also attached copies of the supporting documents, including the letter dated 29/04/2026 by which the Certificate of Taxation is indicated to have been served.
6. After obtaining several adjournments, the Client, through its Advocates, Messrs Khaminwa & Khaminwa & Co ., eventually filed the Replying Affidavit sworn on 27/07/2026 by Nzambu Mwenda , who introduced himself as a Director of the Client. He basically contended that the Client has filed a Notice of Appeal to challenge dismissal of the Application seeking striking out of the Bill of Costs, since, in his opinion, that Application has never been heard and is still pending. He further stated that the Client’s Application at the Court of Appeal seeking stay of execution is pending for determination. He thus urged that, as such, the Client will suffer prejudice if the instant Application is allowed as the Appeal is a strong one.
7. I note that the Advocates-Applicant filed the Further Affidavit sworn on 31/07/2026 in which it was basically urged that the Client has not filed any Reference challenging the Taxation Ruling, and that there is also no order setting aside or of stay of execution. It was also urged that in any event, the alleged Notice of Appeal is incompetent and the Advocates have thus filed an Application at the Court of Appeal seeking its striking out. It was also averred that the Appeal is against the Ruling of Mongare J rendered on 14/11/2024, and not the Taxation Ruling in respect to which no Reference has been filed.
8. The Advocates-Applicant also filed the Submissions dated 31/07/2026. Save for the several authorities cited however, the same is simply a restatement of the contents of the Advocates’ Affidavits.
Determination
9. The issue that calls for determination in this matter is “ whether this Court should enter Judgment on the subject Certificate of Costs ”.
10. On the issue of entry of a Judgment on a Certificate of taxed Costs, Section 51(2) of the Advocates Act provides that:
“The certificate of the taxing officer by whom any bill has been taxed shall, unless it is set aside or altered by the Court, be final as to the amount of the costs covered thereby, and the Court may make such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit, including, in a case where the retainer is not disputed, an order that judgment be entered for the sum certified to be due with costs.”
11. A reading of the above provision supports the Advocate’s contention that once a Certificate of Taxation has been issued, and has neither been set aside nor altered by any Court, then the Court has no option but to enter Judgment thereon. Indeed, this principle has been reiterated in numerous cases. I cite, for instance, the holding of Kamau J , in the case Lubulellah & Associates Advocates v N K Brothers Limited [2014] eKLR, in which she stated that:
“19. The law is very clear that once a taxing master has taxed the costs, issued a Certificate of costs and there is no reference against his ruling or there has been a ruling and a determination made and not set aside and/or altered, no other action would be required from the court save to enter judgment. An applicant is not required to file suit for the recovery of costs. The certificate of costs is final as to the amounts of the costs and the court would be quite in order to enter judgment in favour of the Applicant against the Respondent herein for the taxed sum indicated in the Certificate of Taxation ...”
12. In this case, the authenticity of the Certificate of Costs relied on has not been challenged, and there is also no Reference filed to challenge the taxation. Although Dr. Khaminwa, SC , has urged that the Client shall suffer prejudice if the instant Application is heard and allowed because the Client has filed a Notice of Appeal as a step towards filing an Appeal to challenge the Ruling of Mon’gare J whereof a finding was made that a Retainer had been established, and that the Client’s Application for stay of execution is pending before the Court of Appeal, the fact remains that there is no order from any Court granting any stay of execution in this matter. Postponing determination of the instant Application will therefore amount to issuing a stay of execution through the back-door. In view thereof, I find that no merited ground has been presented to justify refusal to grant the prayer for entry of Judgment for the amount taxed.
13. In respect to the prayer for interest, Rule 7 of the Advocates (Remuneration) Order provides that:
“An advocate may charge interests at 14% per annum on his disbursement and costs whether by scale or otherwise, from the expiration of one month from the delivery of his bill to the client , such claim for interests is raised before the amount of the bill has been paid or tendered in full.” [ Emphasis mine ]
14. As provided in Rule 7 above, interest on taxed costs which remains unsettled accrues from the lapse of 1 month from the date when the Bill of Costs was served (delivered). In other words, there is a 1-month grace period to the client to settle the costs failure whereof the Advocate becomes entitled to charge interest on the costs at 14% per annum once the Bill is subsequently filed.
15. In this case, the Applicant has stated that it served the Bill of Costs upon the Client-Respondent’s Advocates on 27/02/2023. This claim is indeed supported by the email print-out exhibited. Since the Client did not deny or controvert this allegation, I have no reason to doubt the truth thereof. Similarly, since the Client has also not claimed that the demand for interest was never raised before filing of the Bill of Costs, I find that interest is indeed payable and the Applicant’s right to charge interest thereon accrued upon lapse of 1 month after service of the Bill of Costs.
Final Orders
16. For the above reasons, the Advocates-Applicants’ Notice of Motion dated 26/05/2026 is hereby allowed, and I consequently order as follows:
i) Judgment is hereby entered in favour of the Advocates-Applicant against the Client-Respondent for the sum of Kshs 5,077,593.20/-, the sum appearing on the Certificate of Taxation dated 28/04/2026 issued in this matter, together with interest thereon at the rate of 14% per annum, to be computed as from 27/03/2023 being the date of lapse of one month after service of the Bill of Costs upon the Respondent, until payment in full.
ii) The Advocate-Applicant is also awarded the costs of this Application, to be borne by the Client-Respondent.
DELIVERED, DATED AND SIGNED AT NAIROBI THIS 21 ST DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026
……………………..
WANANDA JOHN. R. ANURO
JUDGE
Delivered in the presence of:
Mr. Lundi for the Advocates-Applicant
N/A for the Client-Respondent
Court Assistant: Amos Boso
2. There is no dispute that the Advocate/Client Bill of Costs dated 8/02/2023 was indeed taxed on 13/03/2026 by the Deputy Registrar of this Court, sitting as the Taxing Officer, at the sum of Kshs 5,077,593.20 as appears from the Certificate of Taxation dated 28/04/2026. I understand the Bill of Costs to have been for services rendered by the Advocates in respect to preparation, registration and perfection of a debenture to secure a financial facility.
3. I also note that the Client’s Application seeking striking out of the Bill of Costs on the ground of absence of a Retainer (Advocate-Client relationship) was dismissed on 14/11/2024 by W . Mongare J for non-attendance and/or want of prosecution, and upon the Client filing another Application seeking reinstatement of the earlier Application, the Application for reinstatement was allowed but the earlier Application still dismissed though this time on merits. It is under these circumstances therefore that the Bill of Costs proceeded to taxation.
4. The Advocates have now, in accordance with the provisions of Section 51(2) of the Advocates Act, Paragraph 7 of the Advocates Remuneration Order , moved this Court seeking entry of Judgment for the taxed amount, together with interest at the rate of 14% per annum from 27/03/2023, being a date one month after service upon the Client of the Bill of Costs.
5. In his Supporting Affidavit, Eric Thuge Muchiri , who introduced himself as an Advocate practicing in the Applicant law firm as a Partner, deponed that the Advocates now wish to move to execute the taxed costs hence need for the entry of Judgment. He also attached copies of the supporting documents, including the letter dated 29/04/2026 by which the Certificate of Taxation is indicated to have been served.
6. After obtaining several adjournments, the Client, through its Advocates, Messrs Khaminwa & Khaminwa & Co ., eventually filed the Replying Affidavit sworn on 27/07/2026 by Nzambu Mwenda , who introduced himself as a Director of the Client. He basically contended that the Client has filed a Notice of Appeal to challenge dismissal of the Application seeking striking out of the Bill of Costs, since, in his opinion, that Application has never been heard and is still pending. He further stated that the Client’s Application at the Court of Appeal seeking stay of execution is pending for determination. He thus urged that, as such, the Client will suffer prejudice if the instant Application is allowed as the Appeal is a strong one.
7. I note that the Advocates-Applicant filed the Further Affidavit sworn on 31/07/2026 in which it was basically urged that the Client has not filed any Reference challenging the Taxation Ruling, and that there is also no order setting aside or of stay of execution. It was also urged that in any event, the alleged Notice of Appeal is incompetent and the Advocates have thus filed an Application at the Court of Appeal seeking its striking out. It was also averred that the Appeal is against the Ruling of Mongare J rendered on 14/11/2024, and not the Taxation Ruling in respect to which no Reference has been filed.
8. The Advocates-Applicant also filed the Submissions dated 31/07/2026. Save for the several authorities cited however, the same is simply a restatement of the contents of the Advocates’ Affidavits.
Determination
9. The issue that calls for determination in this matter is “ whether this Court should enter Judgment on the subject Certificate of Costs ”.
10. On the issue of entry of a Judgment on a Certificate of taxed Costs, Section 51(2) of the Advocates Act provides that:
“The certificate of the taxing officer by whom any bill has been taxed shall, unless it is set aside or altered by the Court, be final as to the amount of the costs covered thereby, and the Court may make such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit, including, in a case where the retainer is not disputed, an order that judgment be entered for the sum certified to be due with costs.”
11. A reading of the above provision supports the Advocate’s contention that once a Certificate of Taxation has been issued, and has neither been set aside nor altered by any Court, then the Court has no option but to enter Judgment thereon. Indeed, this principle has been reiterated in numerous cases. I cite, for instance, the holding of Kamau J , in the case Lubulellah & Associates Advocates v N K Brothers Limited [2014] eKLR, in which she stated that:
“19. The law is very clear that once a taxing master has taxed the costs, issued a Certificate of costs and there is no reference against his ruling or there has been a ruling and a determination made and not set aside and/or altered, no other action would be required from the court save to enter judgment. An applicant is not required to file suit for the recovery of costs. The certificate of costs is final as to the amounts of the costs and the court would be quite in order to enter judgment in favour of the Applicant against the Respondent herein for the taxed sum indicated in the Certificate of Taxation ...”
12. In this case, the authenticity of the Certificate of Costs relied on has not been challenged, and there is also no Reference filed to challenge the taxation. Although Dr. Khaminwa, SC , has urged that the Client shall suffer prejudice if the instant Application is heard and allowed because the Client has filed a Notice of Appeal as a step towards filing an Appeal to challenge the Ruling of Mon’gare J whereof a finding was made that a Retainer had been established, and that the Client’s Application for stay of execution is pending before the Court of Appeal, the fact remains that there is no order from any Court granting any stay of execution in this matter. Postponing determination of the instant Application will therefore amount to issuing a stay of execution through the back-door. In view thereof, I find that no merited ground has been presented to justify refusal to grant the prayer for entry of Judgment for the amount taxed.
13. In respect to the prayer for interest, Rule 7 of the Advocates (Remuneration) Order provides that:
“An advocate may charge interests at 14% per annum on his disbursement and costs whether by scale or otherwise, from the expiration of one month from the delivery of his bill to the client , such claim for interests is raised before the amount of the bill has been paid or tendered in full.” [ Emphasis mine ]
14. As provided in Rule 7 above, interest on taxed costs which remains unsettled accrues from the lapse of 1 month from the date when the Bill of Costs was served (delivered). In other words, there is a 1-month grace period to the client to settle the costs failure whereof the Advocate becomes entitled to charge interest on the costs at 14% per annum once the Bill is subsequently filed.
15. In this case, the Applicant has stated that it served the Bill of Costs upon the Client-Respondent’s Advocates on 27/02/2023. This claim is indeed supported by the email print-out exhibited. Since the Client did not deny or controvert this allegation, I have no reason to doubt the truth thereof. Similarly, since the Client has also not claimed that the demand for interest was never raised before filing of the Bill of Costs, I find that interest is indeed payable and the Applicant’s right to charge interest thereon accrued upon lapse of 1 month after service of the Bill of Costs.
Final Orders
16. For the above reasons, the Advocates-Applicants’ Notice of Motion dated 26/05/2026 is hereby allowed, and I consequently order as follows:
i) Judgment is hereby entered in favour of the Advocates-Applicant against the Client-Respondent for the sum of Kshs 5,077,593.20/-, the sum appearing on the Certificate of Taxation dated 28/04/2026 issued in this matter, together with interest thereon at the rate of 14% per annum, to be computed as from 27/03/2023 being the date of lapse of one month after service of the Bill of Costs upon the Respondent, until payment in full.
ii) The Advocate-Applicant is also awarded the costs of this Application, to be borne by the Client-Respondent.
DELIVERED, DATED AND SIGNED AT NAIROBI THIS 21 ST DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026
……………………..
WANANDA JOHN. R. ANURO
JUDGE
Delivered in the presence of:
Mr. Lundi for the Advocates-Applicant
N/A for the Client-Respondent
Court Assistant: Amos Boso