Court orders Nairobi County to pay lawyer Sh498m in legal fees

The High Court has dismissed Nairobi County Government’s attempt to stop payment of nearly Sh500 million to an advocate for services rendered nearly two decades ago, reigniting focus on the county’s long-running disputes with lawyers over unsettled legal bills from the defunct city council era.

Lawyer Samson Masaba, trading as Munikah & Co Advocates, won reprieve after Justice Helene Namisi rejected the county’s bid to nullify his Sh498.7 million bill of costs.

“The applicant has failed to demonstrate any error of principle that would warrant this court’s interference. The allegation that the respondent is seeking to be paid twice for the same work is factually incorrect and not borne out of the record,” Justice Namisi ruled.

At the centre of the row was whether Masaba was entitled to a second payment after he had earlier received Sh60.7 million for representing the then City Council of Nairobi in a land rates dispute.

The county argued he should not have presented a separate bill after the Attorney-General filed a Sh13 billion counterclaim in 2007.

Court documents show Masaba was first instructed in 2003 to pursue recovery of land rates from the Commissioner of Lands, a case that was settled in his favour in 2007.

Later, the council issued him fresh instructions to defend the counterclaim brought by the Attorney-General.

He successfully defended the council, with the court taxing his costs at Sh498.7 million in 2012.

The county challenged the bill in February this year, claiming it amounted to double payment and that the counterclaim did not warrant a separate fee.

However, the advocate insisted the instructions were distinct, as defending a counterclaim is considered a separate suit.

“It was his case that an advocate is entitled to charge separate instruction fees for prosecuting a claim and defending a counterclaim,” noted the judgment.

Justice Namisi upheld this position, stressing that the work was different in scope and scale.

“These were two distinct sets of instructions and two distinct scopes of work. The allegation of a scheme to defraud public funds is a serious one and ought not to be made lightly. On the evidence before me, it is unsubstantiated,” she said.

The judge added that handling the counterclaim required new and substantial legal work, justifying a separate bill.

This latest decision adds to Nairobi County’s troubled history of billion-shilling disputes with advocates over legal fees.

The county is currently fighting another case involving lawyer Donald Kipkorir, who is demanding Sh1.3 billion for services provided in 2012.

A similar matter in 2017 saw the county ordered to pay Professor Tom Ojienda Sh264 million for representing it in five cases.

The ruling could shape future fee disputes by affirming that counterclaims can attract separate instruction fees.