Ojode & Odoto Advocates v County Government of Taita Taveta (Environment and Land Miscellaneous Application E018 of 2024) [2026] KEELC 4369 (KLR)

b. THAT costs of the application herein be awarded to the applicant. 3. The application is supported by the affidavit of Johnson O. Udoto, Advocate, sworn on 12 March 2026. The respondent was served with the application on 19 March 2026 and a return of service filed on the same date. No response is on record on the case tracking system todate. 4. Having considered the application, the single issue for determination is whether this court should enter judgment on the taxed advocate–client costs and, if so, on what terms as to interest. 5. 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.” 6. Jurisprudence under Section 51(2) has crystallised a trilogy of conditions for entry of judgment on a certificate of taxation: (i) the advocate’s bill of costs has been taxed and a certificate issued; (ii) the certificate has not been set aside or altered, and no ELCL MISC E018 OF 2024 Page 2 of 6 JUDGMENT

page 2 of 6

reference (iii) there is is no pending; dispute as and to retainer. Once this trilogy of conditions is satisfied, the certificate is final as to quantum and the court is empowered to enter judgment for the sum certified, without the need for a substantive suit unless some other justiciable issue remains to be tried. This policy of finality in taxation reflects a broader judicial commitment to certainty and efficiency in the recovery of costs, sparing parties and the court the burden of re-litigating matters that have already been quantified by the taxing officer. 7. In this matter, the advocate’s bill of costs was taxed by the taxing officer on 14 August 2024 at Kshs 522,448.00, and a certificate of taxation issued on 24 September 2024. The certificate was served upon the respondent on 27 September 2024. No reference has been filed challenging the taxation, the certificate has not been set aside or altered, and there is no dispute on retainer. The trilogy of conditions under Section 51(2) is therefore fully met. 8. Courts have consistently held in such circumstances that the statutory mechanism obviates the need for a fresh suit and the court’s role is essentially to adopt the certificate as judgment. That position, articulated in Musyoka & Wambua Advocates v Rustam Hira Advocate (2006) eKLR, has been reaffirmed in later decisions, including Ahmednasir Abdikadir & Co. Advocates v National Bank of Kenya Ltd and Kenyariri & Associates Advocates v Salama Beach Hotel Ltd, which ELCL MISC E018 OF 2024 Page 3 of 6 JUDGMENT

page 3 of 6

underscore the finality of an uncontested certificate of costs and the court’s duty to translate it into judgment. 9. On the strength of the uncontested certificate of taxation, and there being no pending challenge to it, this court finds no reason to withhold judgment for the amount certified. 10. The remaining issue concerns interest. The applicant seeks interest at 14% per annum from 13 November 2023 until payment in full, invoking Rule 7 of the Advocates (Remuneration) Order. That rule permits an advocate to charge interest at 14% per annum on disbursements and costs from one month after delivery of the bill to the client, provided the claim for interest is raised before the amount of the bill has been paid or tendered in full. 11. The advocate–client bill of costs in this matter is dated 18 April 2024. The applicant served the respondent with the bill on 13 May 2024, as evidenced by the affidavit of service dated 14 May 2024. However, the bill of costs is silent on any claim for interest at 14% per annum, and the ruling of the taxing master delivered on 14 August 2024 does not address or award interest at 14% per annum or at court rates. The claim for 14% interest appears for the first time in the motion seeking judgment on the certificate. 12. The jurisprudence on Rule 7 draws a clear distinction between statutory interest under that rule and interest at court rates. The entitlement to 14% interest is contingent on the advocate having raised the claim in the bill and on the other ELCL MISC E018 OF 2024 Page 4 of 6 JUDGMENT

page 4 of 6

conditions specified in the rule being satisfied. Decisions such as Machira & Co. Advocates v Arthur K. Magugu & Another [2015] KEHC 8233 (KLR) and more recent rulings on advocate–client taxation have held that where the bill does not plead Rule 7 interest, the statutory entitlement is not available, although the court may still award interest at court rates on the judgment sum in the exercise of its discretion. 13. Guided by that distinction, and in view of the omission of the 14% claim in the bill and in the taxation ruling, this court finds that the applicant has not satisfied the conditions for the grant of interest at 14% per annum under Rule 7. The applicant, however, remains entitled to interest at court rates on the taxed sum once judgment is entered under Section 51(2). 14. The appropriate commencement date for interest at court rates is 30 days from service of the bill, that being one month after delivery to the client as contemplated by Rule 7. In this case, the bill was served on 13 May 2024; interest at court rates will therefore run from 13 June 2024 until payment in full. 15. On costs, Section 27 of the Civil Procedure Act embodies the general principle that costs follow the event. This is a straightforward, unopposed application in which the applicant has succeeded, and no exceptional circumstances have been shown to justify a departure from the general rule. The applicant is accordingly entitled to the costs of the application. ELCL MISC E018 OF 2024 Page 5 of 6 JUDGMENT

page 5 of 6

16. In the result, the Notice of Motion dated 12 March 2026 is allowed in the following terms: a. Judgment is entered in favour of the applicant against the respondent for Kshs 522,448 in accordance with the Certificate of Taxation dated 24 September 2024. b. Interest on the taxed costs shall be at court rates from 13 June 2024 until payment in full. c. The applicant shall have the costs of this application. Orders accordingly. Ruling dated, signed at Mombasa and delivered virtually via Microsoft Teams on this 9th day of July 2026. ……………………………… B. A. AKELLO, OGW JUDGE In the presence of: Gillian – Court Assistant Lukorito h/b Udoto for the applicant ……………… for the respondent ELCL MISC E018 OF 2024 Page 6 of 6 JUDGMENT

page 6 of 6