Nairobi — The Supreme Court of Kenya has dismissed an application by Ecobank Kenya Limited seeking to escalate a dispute over advocate remuneration to the apex court, declaring that the matter does not raise issues of general public importance as required by the Constitution.
This development represents the latest twist in a long-running legal contest between the lender and Macharia Mwangi & Njeru Advocates law firm, over a contentious legal fee of Sh103.4 million.
The Supreme Court, in a ruling delivered by Chief Justice Martha Koome and four other judges DCJ Philomena Mwilu, Justices Smokin Wanjala, Isaac Lenaola, and William Ouko found that the dispute was a private commercial grievance that had already been resolved at lower court levels and did not meet the threshold for further review.
The Supreme Court found that the issues raised were largely specific to the facts of the case and did not meet the constitutional threshold of "general public importance" under Article 163(4)(b).
"The applicant has not demonstrated how the impugned decision transcends mere dissatisfaction and bears on public interest," the bench ruled.
The court emphasized that disagreements in judicial interpretation, even among senior judges, do not automatically elevate a matter to national significance unless it substantially affects the general public or the broader legal framework.
The dispute arose after Ecobank hired Macharia Mwangi & Njeru Advocates to help recover a $228 million (Sh2.9 billion) debt from Hashi Energy Limited.
Sign up for free AllAfrica Newsletters
Get the latest in African news delivered straight to your inbox
The law firm issued statutory notices but took no further recovery action. Despite this, the firm's bill was taxed at Sh43.6 million, which later ballooned to over Sh103 million due to accrued interest.
Ecobank contested the taxation, arguing that the costs were excessive given the limited work done.
They moved to the High Court, which agreed with the bank and ruled that the bill had been wrongly taxed.
However, the Court of Appeal overturned this decision in December 2023, with Justices Omondi and Ngenye-Macharia in the majority holding that the taxing master acted within the law.
Justice M'inoti dissented, stating that a general agreement between the bank and the law firm was a necessary precondition for charging a percentage of the debt.
Ecobank then sought leave to appeal to the Supreme Court, arguing that the case raises significant legal questions with broader implications for the public and legal profession.
