Kenyan court to reassess lawyers’ fees in Kirima case — Nation Kenya
Kenya’s Environment and Land Court has set aside a previous assessment of a legal bill of 37.3 million Kenyan shillings in a land dispute involving the estate of former MP Gerishon Kamau Kirima. Justice Charles Mbogo ordered another officer to reassess the costs of three law firms, Nation Kenya reports.
Claim for 3.37 billion shillings
The firms S Musalia Mwenesi Advocates, Nyamu & Nyamu Co Advocates and PC Onduso & Co Advocates are jointly seeking 3.37 billion Kenyan shillings from Kirima’s estate for legal services in six consolidated court cases. They concerned more than 970 acres of land in Nairobi claimed by people asserting ownership through adverse possession.
The law firms challenged the assessment of 37.3 million shillings, saying it did not take into account the size and value of the plots, as well as the volume of work performed. The judge found that the sizes of both parcels had been incorrectly stated during the assessment.
More current news is available on the UA.News Telegram channel Telegram.
Errors in the assessment
The dispute concerned plot LR No.5908/8, measuring 499 acres, and LR No.6825/2, measuring 471 acres. However, during the assessment of the legal bill, they were incorrectly listed as plots measuring 160 and 80 acres respectively, in line with the land claims of individual plaintiffs. The judge also noted the possible double deduction of 12 million shillings already paid to the lawyers.
At the same time, the court upheld the conclusion that the instruction fee should not be determined on the basis of the value of the disputed real estate. According to the judge, the pleadings and the ruling in the land case did not make it possible to establish the value of the subject matter of the dispute.
In October 2023, the court consolidated six lawsuits filed between 2011 and 2014. Three hundred people sought 80 acres of plot LR No.6825/2 through adverse possession, while the Kamatuto Self-Help Group, with 1,310 members, claimed 160 acres of plot LR No.5908/8. The court dismissed the adverse possession claims because the applicants failed to prove the required possession of the land, but ordered the estate administrators to complete specified agreements with individual buyers.
