Hon. Balyeku v Ali Buk Ben (Labour Dispute Miscellaneous Application 153 of 2020)
Observed later treatment
No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.
Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains good law.
AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions—always read the source judgment before relying on it.
Holding
The Industrial Court set aside the Registrar's taxation ruling and re-taxed the bill of costs. Instruction fees were reduced from 2,000,000/= to 1,133,400/= based on 10% of the claim amount under Rule 1(d). Fees for drawing court documents were recalculated under Rule 10(3) at 50,000/= per document plus copy fees. The court held that disbursements are legitimate costs incurred by litigants during litigation and properly allowable despite not being expressly covered in the Regulations. Attendance fees were upheld. Total costs allowed were reduced from 17,270,000/= to 9,403,400/=.
Outcome
Taxation ruling set aside and bill of costs re-taxed at 9,403,400/= instead of 17,270,000/=
Facts
The respondent filed a labour dispute claim for 11,334,000/= as special damages plus general and exemplary damages. On 25/09/2018, by consent of both parties, an award of 7,000,000/= was entered with costs to be discussed. The parties either did not discuss costs or disagreed, and the matter proceeded to taxation before the Registrar. On 28/10/2020, the Registrar granted costs of 17,270,000/=. The applicant (judgment debtor) was dissatisfied and filed this application challenging the taxation. During the taxation hearing before the Registrar, counsel for both parties had agreed on most items but the Registrar independently decided the instruction fees issue.
Issues
- Whether the Registrar correctly applied the Advocates (Remuneration and Taxation of Costs) Regulations 2018 in taxing instruction fees.
- Whether the Registrar correctly taxed fees for drawing various court documents under Rule 10(3).
- Whether the Registrar correctly taxed fees for drawing a memorandum of claim under Rule 10(1).
- Whether the Registrar correctly allowed attendance fees.
- Whether disbursements were properly allowed despite not being expressly provided for in the Taxation Regulations.
Orders
- The taxation ruling of the Registrar dated 28/10/2020 is set aside.
- Instruction fees allowed at 1,133,400/=.
- Fees for drawing memorandum of claim and related documents allowed at 700,000/=.
- Fees for drawing various court documents (items 3, 6, 9-26) allowed at 110,000/= each, totalling 2,200,000/=.
- Fees for drawing trial bundle allowed at 700,000/=.
- Fees for drawing scheduling memoranda (items 5 and 7) allowed at 420,000/= total.
- Fees for drawing witness statements allowed at 140,000/=.
- Fees for drawing hearing notice allowed at 400,000/=.
- Attendance fees allowed at 2,760,000/=.
- Disbursements allowed at 950,000/=.
- Total bill of costs allowed at 9,403,400/=.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (6)
- Advocates (Remuneration and Taxation of Costs) Regulations SI 123 Rule 1(d)
- Advocates (Remuneration and Taxation of Costs) (Amendment) Regulations 2018 Rule 10(1)
- Advocates (Remuneration and Taxation of Costs) (Amendment) Regulations 2018 Rule 10(2)
- Advocates (Remuneration and Taxation of Costs) (Amendment) Regulations 2018 Rule 10(3)
- Advocates (Remuneration and Taxation of Costs) (Amendment) Regulations 2018 Rule 11(1)
- Advocates (Remuneration and Taxation of Costs) (Amendment) Regulations 2018 Rule 12
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.