Kipteng v Good Hope Sacco Limited (Miscellaneous Application E038 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 128 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Employment Court reopened a litigant's file, confirming you cannot be denied the chance to claim your court-awarded legal 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 Ruling of Hon. W.C. Waswa dated 24th July 2024, which closed the file on the ground that there was no proper claim for assessment of costs, should be set aside
- 2.Whether the file at Kilgoris PM's Employment Cause Number 2 of 2019 should be reopened and the Bill of Costs placed before another Magistrate for taxation
- 3.Whether interest on taxed costs at 14% per annum should be granted
Key legal issues
#Whether the subordinate court was right to close the file for want of a proper claim for assessment of costs
The closure of the file was not the right decision; the orders granting costs did not fall away merely because the Bill of Costs as filed did not conform to Order 21 Rules 9A, 9B and 9C
The Magistrate rejected the Claimant's Bill of Costs for non-conformity with Order 21 Rules 9A, 9B and 9C and closed the file. The Court held that although the Bill was exorbitant and drawn by the Claimant in person, there were on record orders made for costs on certain applications which the Claimant ought not to have been prevented from pursuing. The Claimant should have the opportunity to present a proper claim for costs while the file remains open.
Legal principles established
#- Closing a file before a litigant has exhausted her pursuit of costs, where orders for costs exist on record, is not the right decision
Court orders
#- 1.The application by the Applicant/Claimant is partly allowed
- 2.The file at Kilgoris PM's Employment Cause Number E002 of 2019 shall be reopened
- 3.The Applicant/Claimant may file her Bill of Costs afresh, complying with all the procedures over which her previous Bill of Costs was rejected
- 4.The fresh Bill of Costs be taxed by any other Magistrate with the requisite jurisdiction, other than Hon. Waswa
- 5.The Applicant/Claimant is advised to seek legal advice from a qualified Legal Practitioner, in her pursuit of costs
- 6.No order on the costs
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- On appeal from
- Kilgoris PM's Court
- Employment Cause Number 2 of 2019
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Provisions of the Constitution, the Civil Procedure Act and the Advocates Remuneration Order invoked by the Applicant
Relief refused
#Interest on taxed costs at 14% per annum upon taxation afresh
The Court only ordered reopening of the file and fresh taxation before another Magistrate; no order was made on the 14% interest prayer
Costs
No order on the costs.
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.
closure of the file, before the Claimant could exhaust her pursuit of costs, however misguided that pursuit be, was not the right decision.
It is ordered: a. The application by the Applicant/ Claimant is partly allowed.
The fresh Bill of Costs be taxed by any other Magistrate with the requisite jurisdiction, other that Hon. Waswa.
Issues in the judgment
#The Court could not trace the Respondent's Notice of Preliminary Objection, Response or submissions in the physical file
It is not clear whether the order for costs in the garnishee proceedings was against the garnishee Bank or the Respondent
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Kipteng v Good Hope Sacco Limited (Miscellaneous Application E038 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 128 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Miscellaneous Application (reference) from Kilgoris PM's Employment Cause Number 2 of 2019. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/128/eng@2025-01-28
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.