A logistics firm linked to Mining and Blue Economy Cabinet Secretary Hassan Ali Joho has succeeded in setting aside an auctioneer’s bill of costs after the High Court ordered a fresh taxation of the costs.
High Court Judge Freda Mugambi said that the taxing master failed to consider the objections raised by Autoports Freight Terminals.
“The ruling of the taxing master dated July 15, 2024, in the matter of the taxation of the auctioneer’s bill of costs dated May 6, 2024, is hereby set aside,” the judge said in a February 7, 2025 decision.
The dispute arose from a landlord-tenant relationship between Autoports Freight Terminals Limited and Kay Construction Company Limited. Autoports claimed that after settling all outstanding rent arrears in May 2024, the auctioneer, Skypac Consult Auctioneers, attempted to levy distress for rent and proceeded to file a bill of costs.
Autoports challenged the taxation of the auctioneer’s bill of costs, arguing that the taxing master failed to consider crucial objections, including the valuation of proclaimed goods. The firm added that the taxing master did not consider that the auctioneers had proclaimed goods valued at over Sh40 million to recover rent arrears of Sh5.4 million.
While making her decision, Justice Mugambi said that courts need to exercise caution when dealing with an appeal arising from an assessment or taxation of costs. She added that taxation is usually an exercise of judicial discretion by the taxing master and that a decision by the taxing master ought to be transparent.
“However, precisely because the process involves the exercise of discretion, it is paramount for the taxing master to provide clear and detailed reasons for their decision. Doing so ensures that the parties understand the basis for the assessment and enables meaningful oversight by this court,” Justice Mugambi said.
“The importance of this transparency is heightened by the fact that a court may interfere with a taxing master’s decision if it is demonstrated that the taxation was based on an error of principle or that the fee awarded is so grossly excessive as to constitute an erroneous estimate of the sums due,” the judge added.
Nevertheless, the court went on to order the fresh taxation of the Bill of Costs.
“Flowing from the above, the only logical course of action is to order a fresh taxation of the bill of costs, excluding the two findings already made by the taxing master. These two issues, relating to the mode of service and ownership of the motor vehicles, will not be re-litigated, as doing so would amount to the taxing master sitting on appeal over their own decision” Justice Mugambi said.
“However, the parties will have the opportunity to scrutinise the remaining items in the bill afresh, and if necessary, they may approach this court thereafter” the judge added.
