The court found that an advocate-client relationship existed between the applicant and the respondent, as the respondent acted for the applicant (then a minor) through her next friend in Kisii CMCC No 752 of 2005. Upon attaining majority, the applicant was entitled to demand payment of the decretal sums held by the respondent. The defence of res judicata was rejected, as the issues before the Advocates Disciplinary Tribunal were not identical to those in the present suit. The respondent was found to have received Kshs 1,758,579 on behalf of the applicant, including a portion (Kshs 750,941) that was to be deposited in a joint interest-earning account. The court held that the applicant was entitled to interest only on the amount that was to be deposited in the interest-earning account, not on the entire sum, as there was no instruction or obligation to invest the remainder. The respondent was entitled to deduct her costs as per the Advocates' Remuneration Order but failed to prove any additional out-of-pocket expenses. The court ordered the respondent to pay the applicant the principal sums less her costs, with interest on the specified amount, and awarded costs of the application to the applicant.