Desmond Leteipa Silei t/a Leteipa Silei Law Advocates v Bomet County Public Service Board (Miscellaneous Application E001 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 1878 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court turned a lawyer's Kshs. 6.6 million taxed fees bill into an enforceable judgment, with 14% annual interest, but let the client appeal only if it first deposits the full amount in court.
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 certificate of taxed costs dated 23rd May 2024 should be adopted as a judgment of the Court
- 2.Whether interest at 14% per annum on the taxed costs should be awarded under Rule 7 of the Advocates Remuneration Order
- 3.Whether the Respondent should be granted leave to appeal against the ruling dated 26th November 2024 and stay of proceedings/execution pending the intended appeal
- 4.How to balance the Advocate's right to taxed costs against the Respondent's right of access to the appellate jurisdiction
Key legal issues
#Adoption of the certificate of taxed costs as judgment
The certificate of costs dated 23rd May 2024 for Kshs. 6,631,429.98 was adopted as a judgment of the Court.
The Bill of Costs had been taxed over a year earlier, on 23rd May 2024. The Respondent did not participate in taxation, its application for leave to object dated 8th July 2024 was declined by ruling dated 26th November 2024, and its intended appeal at the Court of Appeal Nakuru had been withdrawn with the consent of the parties. In the interest of justice, the taxed certificate was adopted as judgment.
Interest on taxed costs under Rule 7 of the Advocates Remuneration Order
Interest at 14% per annum effective 29th May 2024 was awarded on the decretal sum.
Rule 7 of the Advocates Remuneration Order entitles an advocate to interest on taxed costs from the expiry of 30 days after service of the Bill of Costs. The Bill was taxed on 23rd May 2024 and the Court allowed interest effective 29th May 2024, aligning with the Advocate's prayer for interest from the 30th day after service.
Balancing the Advocate's right to costs against the Respondent's right of appeal
Stay of execution and leave to appeal were granted conditionally, on deposit of the whole decretal sum in Court within 30 days.
The Court held it must strike a delicate balance between the Advocate's right to his taxed costs and the Respondent's right of access to the appellate jurisdiction. It secured the Advocate's position by requiring deposit of the full decretal sum before stay and leave to appeal would take effect, with automatic lapse on default.
Legal principles established
#- A certificate of taxed advocate-client costs may be adopted as a judgment of the Court, with interest under Rule 7 of the Advocates Remuneration Order, while a respondent's right to appeal may be accommodated through conditional stay secured by deposit of the decretal sum.
Court orders
#- 1.The certificate of costs dated 23rd May 2024 for Kshs. 6,631,429.98, issued pursuant to taxation of the Advocate-Client Bill of Costs dated 24th April 2024, is adopted as a Judgment of the Court
- 2.Interest on the decretal sum at the rate of 14% per annum, effective 29th May 2024, is allowed in accordance with Rule 7 of the Advocates Remuneration Order
- 3.Orders of stay of execution of the decree and leave to appeal against the ruling dated 26th November 2024 are granted to the Respondent on condition that the whole decretal sum of Kshs. 6,631,429.98 is deposited in Court within 30 days of the ruling
- 4.Upon deposit of security, the Respondent shall have leave of 30 days from the date deposit is made to file its appeal against the ruling dated 26th November 2024
- 5.In default of any condition, all orders under paragraph (c) shall automatically lapse and the Advocate is placed at liberty to execute
- 6.No order on the costs of the two applications
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Inherent jurisdiction of the Court and Rule 7 of the Advocates Remuneration Order
- Consolidated with
- Advocate's application dated 3rd December 2024 and Client's application dated 9th January 2025, consolidated on 29th April 2025
Relief refused
#Unconditional stay of proceedings pending finalization of the intended appeal
Stay was granted only on condition of deposit of the whole decretal sum; default causes the orders to lapse
Costs
No order on the costs of the two applications.
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.
The certificate of costs dated 23rd May 2024 for Kshs. 6,631,429.98, issued pursuant to taxation of the Advocate-Client Bill of Costs dated 24th April 2024, is adopted as a Judgment of the Court.
The prayer for interest on the decretal sum, at the rate of 14% per annum, efiective 29th May 2024 is allowed, in accordance with Rule 7 of the Advocates Remuneration Order.
In default of any condition, all the orders under paragraph [c] shall automatically lapse, and the Advocate placed at liberty to execute.
In the interest of justice, it is ordered
Issues in the judgment
#Recurring typographical error 'efiective' for 'effective' in the ruling text
The ruling does not state the case number, the name of the Respondent, or the court rank/statute under which it is expressly determined; identified only as delivered electronically at Kericho by James Rika, Judge
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Desmond Leteipa Silei t/a Leteipa Silei Law Advocates v Bomet County Public Service Board (Miscellaneous Application E001 of 2024) [2025] KEELRC 1878 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in the ruling. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/1878/eng@2025-06-27
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.