DECISION
This is a reference from a taxing officer’s decision, under Rule 109 of the Rules of this Court by Mr Ouma, the unsuccessful appellant to this Court in Civil Appeal No 52 at Kisumu. Mr Azangalala, who appeared at the hearing for three of the five respondents, filed a bill of costs for over Kshs 9,000 of which Kshs 4,250 was taxed off; the bill as taxed being certified at Kshs 5,026 should be substantially reduced.
He also submits that Mr Azangalala is not entitled to any costs at all. I will deal with this second submission first. It is based on the following premises. Mr Azangalala had appeared in the High Court for three of the successful defendants. This being so, it was proper for Mr Ouma to serve him with the notice of appeal, as he did, under rule 76(2). Mr Azangalala should then have filed a full and sufficient address for service, under rule 78(1). He did not do so, and I have no explanation for this omission. Mr Ouma submits that in these circumstances, it must be assu…