Mulwa & Mulwa Advocates v County Government of Machakos
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court ordered Machakos County to pay a law firm Kshs 7.76 million in legal fees because the county never challenged the taxed costs.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether the Court should enter judgment in favour of the Applicant on the Certificate of Taxation for the sum of Kshs. 7,759,975/=
Key legal issues
#Whether judgment may be entered on an unchallenged Certificate of Taxation under Section 51(2) of the Advocates Act
Yes; the certificate is final as to the amount unless set aside or altered, and where the retainer is not disputed judgment must be entered for the certified sum.
Section 51(2) establishes a summary procedure for recovery of taxed costs. The certificate of the taxing officer is final as to the amount of costs unless set aside or altered by the Court. The Court does not sit on appeal over the taxation unless a reference is filed under Rule 11 of the Advocates Remuneration Order. Here no reference was filed, the retainer is undisputed, and the Respondent filed no response or submissions, so no material challenged the certified amount.
Legal principles established
#- Once a certificate of costs has been issued and no reference filed, the court's only role is to enter judgment for the certified sum.
Court orders
#- 1.Judgment entered in favour of the Advocate/Applicant against the Respondent for Kshs. 7,759,975/= being the taxed costs as per the Certificate of Taxation
- 2.Costs of the Application awarded to the Applicant
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Section 51(2) of the Advocates Act; Sections 1A, 1B and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act; Order 51(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules; Advocates Remuneration Order
Quotable passages
#Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.
Where the certificate has not been set aside and the retainer is not disputed, the Court’s role is limited to entering judgment for the certified sum.
Judgment is hereby entered in favour of the Advocate/Applicant against the Respondent for the sum of Kshs. 7,759,975/= (Kenya Shillings Seven Million Seven Hundred and Fifty-Nine Thousand Nine Hundred and Seventy-Five only) being the taxed costs as per the Certificate of Taxation.
Issues in the judgment
#Conflicting dates for the Notice of Motion
Ruling refers to motion as dated 14th June 2025
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Mulwa & Mulwa Advocates v County Government of Machakos", Case Analysis (2026). ELCMISC NO. 2 OF 2021. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/5746/eng@2026-09-24
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.