The High Court’s Commercial and Tax Division entered judgment against John Fitzgerald Osogo in favour of LJA Associates LLP after finding that the firm was entitled to recover costs certified following taxation of its Advocate-Client Bill of Costs.

The dispute arose from legal services provided by LJA Associates when it represented Osogo before a tribunal appointed under Article 168(5)(b) of the Constitution to investigate the conduct of Justice Philip Kiptoo Tunoi.

The law firm had initially presented a bill of costs amounting to Sh9,074,728 on July 12, 2017, but the amount was substantially reduced by the Deputy Registrar following taxation.

On January 9, 2018, the taxing officer assessed the firm’s legal fees at Sh155,677.50, with a Certificate of Costs subsequently issued on December 16, 2021.

The firm moved to court seeking judgment for the certified amount, arguing that Osogo had failed to settle the fees despite being served with the bill and notice of taxation.

Justice Winnie Narasha Molonko found that the certificate of taxation had neither been challenged nor set aside, making the amount legally recoverable under Section 51(2) of the Advocates Act.

“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,” the law provides.

Judge Molonko noted that there was no evidence that Osogo had filed a reference challenging the taxation or obtained orders staying or setting aside the certificate.

She further found that the documents presented demonstrated the existence of an advocate-client relationship between the parties, with no dispute over the firm’s retainer.

“The certified amount is therefore final for purposes of Section 51(2),” Judge Molonko ruled.

However, the judge declined the firm’s request for interest at 14 per cent annually dating back to July 12, 2017.

LJA Associates had argued that it was entitled to interest from the date it filed its bill of costs, but the court found that it had failed to demonstrate compliance with Rule 7 of the Advocates Remuneration Order.

The rule requires an advocate to demonstrate that the bill was delivered to the client, one month elapsed without payment, and notice of the intention to charge interest was given before settlement.

The court observed that although the bill was served through registered post on October 6, 2017, the firm had not established that it had notified Osogo of its intention to charge interest before payment.

Nevertheless, the judge ruled that the law firm was entitled to interest at court rates from the date judgment was entered until payment in full.

The court explained that once judgment is entered, the certified costs acquire the character of a judgment debt, attracting interest under Section 26 of the Civil Procedure Act.

The post Court orders John Osogo to pay lawyer Sh155,677 in legal fees over ex-Judge Philip Tunoi removal case appeared first on Insider Bits News.