Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Original judgment

Francis Njonjo & Johnstone Okello t/a Njonjo Okello & Associates v Maryanne Thande, Benjamin Mumbi Gitau & Charles Joseph Nzau Thande

REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT AT NAIROBI, MILIMANI CLC MISC SUIT NO. E275 OF 2025 FRANCIS NJONJO & JOHNSTONE OKELLO t/a NJONJO OKELLO & ASSOCIATES ………..APPLICANT VERSUS MARYANNE RESPONDENT BENJAMIN RESPONDENT THANDE……………………………1ST MUMBI GITAU CHARLES JOSEPH RESPONDENT ……................... THANDE………….......………………2ND NZAU THANDE…………………………3RD JUDGEMENT 1. The court, by an application dated 17.3.2026, is asked by the Applicant to grant the following orders: a) That the Certificate of costs made in respect of the taxation order made on 26th November 2025 for Kenya Shillings Six Hundred and Sixty-Four Thousand Seven Hundred and Ninety-Four Only (Kshs. 664,794/-) be adopted as judgment and decree of this court together

page 1 of 8

with interest at 14% per annum from the date of filing of the bill on 1.9.2025 till payment in full. b) That the costs of this application be provided for. 2. The application is premised on the grounds set out on its face and the Supporting Affidavit sworn on 17.3.2026 by Francis Maina Njonjo. 3. The deponent deposes that he is a partner in the firm of Njonjo, Okello and Associates and has conduct of the present matter. 4. The deponent deposes that the application concerns the Applicant’s Advocate-Client Bill of Costs in ELC MISC No. E275 of 2025, Nairobi. A copy of the Advocate-Client Bill of Costs is annexed to the affidavit. 5. It is deposed that the taxation arose from a non-contentious matter relating to the conveyancing of property known as L.R. No. 4871/236. 6. The deponent further deposes that the Advocate-Client Bill of Costs was duly taxed by the Court and a Certificate of Costs was subsequently issued. A copy of the Certificate of Costs is annexed and marked “FN-2”.

page 2 of 8

7. It is further deposed that the Certificate of Costs has neither been set aside nor otherwise challenged and continues to remain valid and in force as an order of the Court. 8. The deponent deposes that the taxed costs remain unpaid by the Respondent, whether in whole or in part, and that the Respondent remains liable for the entire amount certified as due. 9. It is further deposed that the Respondent has not made any payment or deposit towards settlement of the taxed legal fees. The deponent maintains that there is no dispute as to the amount due. 10. It is deposed that the aforesaid amount owing to the Applicant has been conclusively certified by the Certificate of Costs. In the circumstances, the Applicant urges the Court to grant the orders sought in the application to enable it to proceed with execution of the Certificate of Costs and secure settlement of the taxed costs. 11. The Court has carefully considered the application, the Supporting Affidavit and the material placed before it. The only issue for determination is whether the Applicant has

page 3 of 8

satisfied the requirements for entry of judgment on the Certificate of Costs. 12. 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.” 13. The effect of the provision is that upon taxation of an Advocate-Client Bill of Costs and issuance of a Certificate of Costs, the certificate is conclusive as to the amount of costs certified, unless it is subsequently set aside or varied by the Court. 14. of Where the retainer is not in dispute, and the Certificate Costs remains valid and unaltered, the Court is empowered to enter judgment for the amount certified as due.

page 4 of 8

15. Rule 7 of the Advocates (Remuneration) Order provides — “An advocate may charge interest at 14 per cent per annum on his disbursements and costs, whether by scale or otherwise, from the expiration of one month from the delivery of his bill to the client, provided that such claim for interest is raised before the amount of the bill shall have been paid or tendered in full.” 16. In Ahmednasir, Abdikadir & Company Advocates v National Bank of Kenya Limited[2006] eKLR, the court observed that three elements to establish before entry of judgment are: the certificate itself; the jurisdiction of the court over it; and the circumstances in which the court may exercise its discretion to enter judgment in its terms. 17. In this application, there exists a regularly issued certificate of costs which on its face has not been unimpeached. The retainer is not disputed. No reference under Rule 11 of the Advocates (Remuneration) Order has

page 5 of 8

been filed, and no application has been made to set the certificate aside or to alter it. 18. It therefore follows that the Advocate Applicant is in his right, entitled to apply for entry of judgment on the certificate of taxation since the certificate of taxation has not been set aside, in the absence of a dispute as to retainer, and lastly, given there is no pending reference filed by the respondent challenging the certificate by the taxing master. 19. In Lubulellah & Associates Advocates v N. K. Brothers Limited (2014) eKLR, the court observed that: “The law is very clear that once a taxing master has taxed the costs, issued a Certificate of Costs, and there is no, or there has been a ruling and a determination made and not set aside and/or altered, no other action would be required from the court save to enter judgment. An applicant is not required to file suit for the recovery of costs. The certificate of costs is final as to the amounts of the costs and the court would be quite to enter judgment in favour of the Applicant against the Respondent herein for the

page 6 of 8

taxed sum indicated in the Certificate of Taxation that was issued on 25th November 2012.” 20. In Kithi & Company Advocates v Menengai Downs Limited, (2015) KEHC 6334(KLR), the Court noted that a court will generally enter judgment for a certified amount under Section 51(2) unless the retainer is disputed or the Certificate of Costs has been altered or set aside. 21. The same position has been affirmed in subsequent decisions of the Environment and Land Court. In AI Onyango & Company B Advocates v Chege [2024] KEELC 6682 (KLR), the Court applied Section 51(2) and held that where the Certificate of Costs has not been set aside or altered, and there is no dispute regarding the retainer, the Court is bound to give effect to the certificate. 22. Accordingly, judgment is hereby entered in favour of the applicant advocate on the taxed costs of Kenya Shillings Six Hundred and Sixty-Four Thousand Seven Hundred and Ninety-Four Only (Kshs. 664,794/-) as per the certificate of taxation dated 26th November 2025.

page 7 of 8

23. The Applicant is at liberty to pursue execution proceedings of the resultant decree. 24. Orders accordingly. DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT NAIROBI THIS 30TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 ……………………………………… HON. JUSTICE C.K NZILI JUDGE In the presence of: Court Assistant: Julius

page 8 of 8

A note on accuracy. These pages are generated automatically from our AI-written case briefs and have not been checked by a lawyer. Case titles and citations come from Kenya Law; the counts, topics, propositions and “treatment” labels are derived from the briefs and can be incomplete or wrong. Use them as a research aid and always read the original judgment before relying on anything here. This is not legal advice.