1. The Applicant herein approached the court seeking enlargement and/or extension of time within which to file an objection through a Reference to the Deputy Registrar’s decision on the bill of costs dated 25/9/2024 taxed on 21/5/2025.
2. The application dated 9 th June, 2025 is premised on grounds that the bill of costs dated on 25/09/2024 seeking a sum of kshs.2,606,056/= by the Applicant was taxed at kshs.337,940/= and the Applicant being aggrieved by the taxing master’s decision, he intends to file a Reference. That the delay of 2 days was occasioned by delay in supply of the Taxing master’s reasons for taxation.
3. The Respondent was served with the application but he neither filed a response nor appeared in court to defend the allegations. Hence, the application is unopposed.
4. Rule 11 (1) (2) and (4) of the Advocates (Remuneration) Order Provides thus:
(1) Should any party object to the decision of the taxing officer, he may within fourteen days after the decision give notice in writing to the taxing officer of the items of taxation to which he objects.
(2) The taxing officer shall forthwith record and forward to the objector the reasons for his decision on those items and the objector may within fourteen days from the receipt of the reasons apply to a judge by chamber summons, which shall be served on all the parties concerned, setting out the grounds of his objection.
(3) ……
(4) The High Court shall have power in its discretion by order to enlarge the time fixed by subparagraph (1) or subparagraph (2) far the taking of any step; application for such an order may be made by chamber summons upon giving to every other interested party not less than three clear days’ notice in writing or as the Court may direct, and may be so made notwithstanding that the time sought to be enlarged may have already expired.
5. The Applicant being dissatisfied with the decision of the taxing officer was required to file a Notice of Objection within 14 days of the decision.
6. It is urged that the 14 days within which the Reference was to be filed lapsed on 03/06/2025, in the result, this was two a (2) days delay.
7. In Paul Wanjohi Mathenge v Duncan Gichane Mathenge [2013] eKLR the Court of Appeal stated that:
“ Rule 4 is unfettered, but it has to be exercised judicially, not on whim, sympathy or caprice. I take note that in exercising my discretion I ought to be guided by consideration of the factors stated in previous decisions of this Court including, but not limited to, the period of delay, the reasons for the delay, the degree of prejudice to the respondent and interested parties if the application is granted”.
8. Further, I do take into consideration the Principles laid down in Nicholas Kiptoo Arap Korir Salat v IEBC & 7 Others [2014] eKLR concerning the extension of time being an equitable remedy that is discretionary which calls for a reasonable explanation that is not prejudicial to the respondent being put forth. In the absence of any opposition, the reason for the delay advanced has been satisfactorily explained.
9. In the premises I grant the Applicant leave to file an objection through a Reference to the Taxing Master’s decision on the bill of costs dated 25/09/2024 taxed on 21/05/2025 which should be done within 14 days hereof.
10. There is no order as to costs.
11. It is so ordered.
2. The application dated 9 th June, 2025 is premised on grounds that the bill of costs dated on 25/09/2024 seeking a sum of kshs.2,606,056/= by the Applicant was taxed at kshs.337,940/= and the Applicant being aggrieved by the taxing master’s decision, he intends to file a Reference. That the delay of 2 days was occasioned by delay in supply of the Taxing master’s reasons for taxation.
3. The Respondent was served with the application but he neither filed a response nor appeared in court to defend the allegations. Hence, the application is unopposed.
4. Rule 11 (1) (2) and (4) of the Advocates (Remuneration) Order Provides thus:
(1) Should any party object to the decision of the taxing officer, he may within fourteen days after the decision give notice in writing to the taxing officer of the items of taxation to which he objects.
(2) The taxing officer shall forthwith record and forward to the objector the reasons for his decision on those items and the objector may within fourteen days from the receipt of the reasons apply to a judge by chamber summons, which shall be served on all the parties concerned, setting out the grounds of his objection.
(3) ……
(4) The High Court shall have power in its discretion by order to enlarge the time fixed by subparagraph (1) or subparagraph (2) far the taking of any step; application for such an order may be made by chamber summons upon giving to every other interested party not less than three clear days’ notice in writing or as the Court may direct, and may be so made notwithstanding that the time sought to be enlarged may have already expired.
5. The Applicant being dissatisfied with the decision of the taxing officer was required to file a Notice of Objection within 14 days of the decision.
6. It is urged that the 14 days within which the Reference was to be filed lapsed on 03/06/2025, in the result, this was two a (2) days delay.
7. In Paul Wanjohi Mathenge v Duncan Gichane Mathenge [2013] eKLR the Court of Appeal stated that:
“ Rule 4 is unfettered, but it has to be exercised judicially, not on whim, sympathy or caprice. I take note that in exercising my discretion I ought to be guided by consideration of the factors stated in previous decisions of this Court including, but not limited to, the period of delay, the reasons for the delay, the degree of prejudice to the respondent and interested parties if the application is granted”.
8. Further, I do take into consideration the Principles laid down in Nicholas Kiptoo Arap Korir Salat v IEBC & 7 Others [2014] eKLR concerning the extension of time being an equitable remedy that is discretionary which calls for a reasonable explanation that is not prejudicial to the respondent being put forth. In the absence of any opposition, the reason for the delay advanced has been satisfactorily explained.
9. In the premises I grant the Applicant leave to file an objection through a Reference to the Taxing Master’s decision on the bill of costs dated 25/09/2024 taxed on 21/05/2025 which should be done within 14 days hereof.
10. There is no order as to costs.
11. It is so ordered.