Uganda Case Law

M/s Odokel Opolot & Co. Advocates v Springs International Limited

M/s Odokel Opolot & Co. Advocates v Springs International Limited (Miscellaneous Cause 74 of 2023) [2023] UGCommC 191 (27 November 2023)

Court

Commercial Court of Uganda

Case number

Miscellaneous Cause 74 of 2023

Judge

Mutesi, J

The court found that the applicant had fulfilled all statutory requirements for taxation of an advocate's bill of costs. The bill was properly signed and delivered to the respondent's managing director, who, though refusing to personally acknowledge receipt, became aware of the documents and instructed his secretary to receive them. The respondent did not dispute the existence of the advocate-client relationship or prove payment of legal fees. The court held that the applicant was entitled to have its bill of costs taxed, and the respondent's objections regarding service and indebtedness were…

Source excerpt

• Advocate Client Fees
• Taxation Of Costs
• Service Of Process
• Enforcement Of Costs

M/s Odokel Opolot & Co. Advocates v Shumuk Investments Limited

M/s Odokel Opolot & Co. Advocates v Shumuk Investments Limited (Miscellaneous Application 77 of 2023) [2023] UGCommC 193 (27 November 2023)

Court

Commercial Court of Uganda

Case number

Miscellaneous Application 77 of 2023

Judge

Mutesi, J

The applicant established that it provided legal services to the respondent in the referenced suits and applications, and that the bill of costs and demand letter were duly delivered to the respondent's managing director, who became aware of their contents. The requirements under Section 57 of the Advocates Act for delivery and service of the bill of costs were satisfied. The respondent failed to demonstrate payment of legal fees or any defect in service that would preclude taxation. The absence of a written agreement for fees does not bar the applicant from seeking taxation, and the court is…

Source excerpt

• Advocate Client Fees
• Taxation Of Costs
• Service Of Process
• Enforcement Of Costs

Matovu & Matovu Advocates v Attorney General & 2 Others

Matovu & Matovu Advocates v Attorney General & 2 Others (Civil Application 560 of 2022) [2023] UGCA 347 (15 November 2023)

Court

Court of Appeal of Uganda

Case number

Civil Application 560 of 2022

Judge

Muzamiru, JA

The Court of Appeal modified an injunction over payment of pension-related decretal sums, directing 80% to beneficiaries and 20% to the applicant advocates.

• Temporary Injunctions
• Payment Of Decretal Sums
• Advocate Client Fees
• Pension Awards
• Enforcement Of Judgments
• Temporary-injunctions

Uganda National Roads Authority v Kasekende & 2 Ors

Uganda National Roads Authority v Kasekende & 2 Ors (Miscellaneous Application No. 1230 of 2016) [2017] UGCommC 30 (7 April 2017)

Court

Commercial Court of Uganda

Case number

Miscellaneous Application No. 1230 of 2016

The court found that the applicant raised genuine triable issues regarding the enforceability and legal effect of the memorandum of understanding (MOU) executed between the parties for payment of legal fees. The MOU's compliance with sections 50 and 51 of the Advocates Act, its use as a defence to the respondents' claim for further fees, and the question of whether payment was made under the MOU are all matters requiring further argument and cannot be disposed of summarily. Additionally, the respondents' reliance on a party to party bill of costs as a basis for remuneration raises legal quest…

Source excerpt

• Summary Procedure
• Leave To Defend
• Advocate Client Fees
• Enforceability Of Mou
• Taxation Of Costs

Kemigisha v Kasango (CIVILS SUIT NO.261 OF 2010)

Kemigisha v Kasango (CIVILS SUIT NO.261 OF 2010) [2017] UGHCCD 60 (2 March 2017)

Court

HC: Civil Division (Uganda)

Case number

CIVILS SUIT NO.261 OF 2010

Judge

Musota, J

The High Court of Uganda held that the defendant failed to prove valid retainer agreements and ordered him to pay the plaintiff UGX 3,376,050,000 plus interest.

• Advocate Client Fees
• Remittance Of Funds
• Retainer Agreement Validity
• Counterclaim For Debt
• Interest On Decretal Sum
• Advocate-client-fees

Lyazi v S& Anorempa

Lyazi v S& Anorempa (Miscellaneous Cause No. 02 of 2012) [2015] UGHCFD 15 (10 February 2015)

Court

HC: Family Division (Uganda)

Case number

Miscellaneous Cause No. 02 of 2012

Judge

Bamugemereire, J

The court found that the appellant was not accorded a fair hearing, as she was notified of the taxation hearing only by SMS and was not given adequate opportunity to prepare or engage counsel. The taxing officer failed to consider that the law firm was contracted for only part of the representation and did not follow the case to its conclusion. The officer also did not adhere to the prescribed rules for taxation of costs, resulting in arbitrary and excessive fees. The right to a fair hearing is fundamental and cannot be derogated. The principles governing taxation of costs require that awards…

Source excerpt

• Taxation Of Costs
• Fair Hearing
• Advocate Client Fees
• Natural Justice

Punjani Motors Limited v Sam K . Njuba

Punjani Motors Limited v Sam K . Njuba (Miscellaneous Taxation Appeal 1144 of 1997) [1998] UGHC 27 (14 April 1998)

Court

High Court of Uganda

Case number

Miscellaneous Taxation Appeal 1144 of 1997

Judges

Malinga, j

The court found that the respondent advocate received instructions in December 1996 while in possession of a valid practising certificate, and renewed his certificate before completing the work. Therefore, he was entitled to recover his costs. The court held that the proper procedure for recovery of advocate-client costs requires the advocate to obtain a taxing certificate and then file a suit for recovery; the taxing certificate alone is not executable. The court also determined that the items in the bill of costs were properly charged under the fifth schedule, as they were not covered by th…

Source excerpt

• Taxation Of Costs
• Advocate Client Fees
• Practising Certificate Requirements
• Vat On Legal Fees

Alexander Jo Okello v M/s Kayondo & Co. Advocates

Alexander Jo Okello v M/s Kayondo & Co. Advocates (Civil Appeal 1 of 1997) [1998] UGSC 4 (2 February 1998)

Court

Supreme Court of Uganda

Case number

Civil Appeal 1 of 1997

Supreme Court of Uganda upheld most of an advocate-client taxation, finding the matter contentious, the instruction fee not manifestly excessive, and the one-third rule applicable.

• Taxation Of Costs
• Advocate Client Fees
• Remuneration Rules
• Instruction Fee Assessment
• Contentious Vs Non Contentious Matters
• Taxation-of-costs