1.This ruling is in respect to the applicant’s chamber summons dated April 5, 2022 brought pursuant to paragraph 11(2) & 4 of the Advocates (Remuneration) Order and article 159 (2) (d) of the Constitution. The Applicant seeks the following Orders:1.That the decision of the Taxing Officer dated December 21, 2021 on the Bill of Costs dated April 18, 2019be set aside and the Bill of Costs be placed before a different taxing officer for taxation.2.That the applicant be granted an extension of time within which to file this Application and the same be deemed to have been filed in time.3.That in the alternative to prayer 2, the Honourable Court exercises its inherent jurisdiction and be pleased to re-tax the Bill of Costs dated April 18, 2019 afresh and/or make directions to a fresh taxation.4.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 of Kairu Timothy Waweru, an Advocate from the firm Messrs Mbai Waweru Advocates who have the conduct of this matter on behalf of the Applicant.
3.The respondent did not oppose the application or participate in these proceedings.
4.The applicant canvassed the application through written submissions, which the court has duly considered alongside the prayers sought and the grounds in support of the application. In the court’s considered view, the only issue that arise for determination is whether theapplicant has made out a case for extension of the time within which to file a Reference, herein stated as the Application.
5.The legal framework on extension of time within which to file a reference or objection from a decision of a taxing officer is clearly stipulated under Paragraph 11 of the Advocates Remuneration Order which provides as follows:
8.In the instant case, the taxing officer gave her Ruling and Reasons for taxation on the Applicant’s Advocate-Client Bill of Costs onDecember 21, 2021. The Applicant did not file any Notice of objection to the taxation up to March 24, 2022, followed by the instant application on April 5, 2022. It is therefore undisputed that there was a delay of over three months in the filing of both the Notice of Objection and Reference against the taxing officer’s decision.
9.As regards the reasons for the delay in filing the Notice of Objection and Reference, the Applicant simply states that it obtained a copy of the ruling on March 16, 2022after the legally provided period had lapsed. Notably however, the Applicant has not informed the court whether they experienced any difficulties in obtaining a copy of the said decision within time, which copy was duly typed and signed at date of delivery of the Taxing officer's ruling. They have also not demonstrated any efforts made towards obtaining the same, if at all. In the premises, the court finds that the delay has not been satisfactorily explained. There are no valid reasons upon which this court can exercise its discretion to extend the time within which to file a Reference in the circumstances of this case.
10.For the foregoing, the court finds that the Applicant’s chamber summons dated April 5, 2022is devoid of merit. It is hereby dismissed with no orders as to costs since the respondent did not participate in these proceedings.Orders accordingly.