A. Whether the applicant is entitled to orders for enlargement of time within which to file a Reference.
17.Paragraph 11 of the Advocates Remuneration Order provides as follows;
19.The Client herein concedes that it did not comply with the provisions of Paragraph 11(1) and (2) of the Advocates Remuneration Order which spells out the time within which to file a Reference. The Client attributes the delay to the alleged failure by the Taxing Master to give reasons for taxation and availing the Ruling in good time. Surprisingly, the Applicant does not state when it eventually received the said reasons and ruling, if at all it did.
20.In Fahim Yasin Twaha v Timamy Issa Abdalla & 2 Others  eKLR the Supreme Court, reiterated the general principles governing extension of time, thus: -
21.Mohammed J. (as he then was) held as follows in the case of George Kagima Kariuki & 2 Others vs George M. Gichimu & 2 Others  eKLR, on the issue of delay: -
22.The same position was taken in Stanley Kahoro Mwangi & 2 Others v Kanyamwi Trading Company Limited  eKLR where the court was of the view that: -
23.From the decisions cited above the court has the discretion to allow an application for extension of time where ‘the whole period of delay is declared and explained satisfactorily to the Court’. From the record, the Advocate’s Bill of Costs is dated 5th March, 2021.
24.From the record, the Ruling of the taxing master was delivered on 19th May, 2022. The instant application was filed on the 28th July, 2022. The delay in filing the application is for about 65 days. A perusal of the impugned ruling clearly indicates that the reasons for taxation are contained in the ruling. This being the case, I find that it there was no need for the Client to yet again make a request for the reasons for taxation.
25.I am guided by the decision in Ahmednasir Abdikadir & Co. Advocates v National Bank of Kenya Ltd (2) (2006) 1 EA 5 where the court held as follows: -
26.Similarly, Odunga J. (as then was) stated as follows in Evans Thiga Gaturu, Advocate vs.- Kenya Commercial Bank Limited  eKLR:
27.From the foregoing, I find that the Client/Applicant has not satisfactorily explained the delay and is therefore not entitled to the court’s discretion. The Prayer for extension of time therefore fails.
28.Having found that the prayer for extension of time is not merited, it logically follows that there would be no basis for addressing the second issue for determination on whether the Reference filed herein is merited or not.
29.The upshot is that the Client/Applicant’s Chamber Summons dated 28th July 2022 is hereby dismissed with costs to the Advocate/ Respondent.
It is so ordered