SINGH GITAU ADVOCATES v CITY FINANCE BANK LIMITED [2013] KEHC 4102 (KLR)

REPUBLIC OF KENYA

High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)

Civil Miscellaneous 116 of 2010 [if !mso]> <style> v:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} o:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} w:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} .shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);} </style> <![endif]

IN THE MATTER OF THE ADVOCATES ACT

AND

IN THE ADVOCATES REMUNERATION ORDER

AND

IN THE MATTER OF THE ADVOCATES CLIENT BILL OF COSTS

SINGH GITAU ADVOCATES…………….................................................ADVOCATE

VERSUS

CITY FINANCE BANK LIMITED.................................................................CLIENT

JUDGMENT

1. This matter is related to HC MISC No. 698 of 2011, 116 of 2011 and 834 of 2011. On 22nd February, 2013, the parties agreed that since all the applications, facts relied on, the Affidavits and the law were similar in all these matters, the issue of liability be decided in HC Misc 698 of 2011 and the same do apply to the rest. In the said HC Misc No. 698 of 2011, the client was found liable and judgment was entered accordingly.

2. In this matter therefore, I will allow the Notice of Motion dated 3rd December, 2011 and enter judgment against the client for Kshs.89,020/72 being the certified costs due. The client shall also pay interest on the certified costs at the rate of 14% per annum from 20th December, 2011 till payment in full. The Advocates shall also have the costs of the application.

DATED and DELIVERED at Nairobi this 12th day of April, 2013

............................................

A. MABEYA

JUDGE

[if gte mso 9]><xml>

Normal 0

false false false

EN-US X-NONE X-NONE

</xml><![endif][if gte mso 9]><![endif][if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-style-parent:""; line-height:115%; font-size:11. 0pt;"Calibri","sans-serif";} </style> <![endif]