Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Uganda decisions
Decisions matching the current search
Ms Guma and Company Advocates v Lule and Another (Misc cause. 141/2024) [2025] UGHCLD 140 (17 July 2025)
The High Court granted an advocate leave to present an advocate-client bill of costs for taxation after finding an advocate-client relationship and unchallenged evidence of work done.
Masiko v Magara and 4 Others (Civil Appeal 39 of 2024) [2025] UGHC 87 (31 January 2025)
The High Court at Hoima dismissed a civil appeal, upheld the competence of a late-filed memorandum by excluding time spent preparing the record, and confirmed the bill of costs proceedings.
Nsungwa & Another v Manyire (Taxation Appeal 1 of 2024) [2024] UGHC 939 (20 September 2024)
The court held that the Deputy Registrar correctly exercised discretion in taxing instruction fees at UGX. 5,000,000/=, given that the matter was settled by consent before a full trial and the value of the subject matter could be ascertained from the pleadings and valuation report. The court found no basis to interfere with the Registrar's decision on Item No. 1. Regarding Items 32-37, the court agreed that the receipts submitted by the appellants were unreliable and likely forged, justifying the Registrar's refusal to rely on them. However, the court recognized that the appellants did attend…
Source excerpt
Serwada v TSMP (U) Limited (Civil Revision 19 of 2022) [2024] UGHC 571 (20 May 2024)
The High Court revised a magistrate’s dismissal of a Bill of Costs, holding that taxation should proceed ex parte under the Advocates Regulations, not be dismissed under Order 9 Rule 22 CPR.
Tinka v Butera and Another (Miscellaneous Application 39 of 2021) [2024] UGHC 429 (26 April 2024)
The High Court partly allowed an application to set aside taxation, disallowing costs for items tied to other matters and reducing the taxed amount accordingly.
Nagujja v National Forestry Authority and Another (Civil Miscellaneous Application 45 of 2023) [2024] UGHC 507 (4 March 2024)
The court found that the applicant failed to satisfy the mandatory conditions for a stay of execution. There was no imminent threat of execution as no application for execution had been filed; the mere extraction of the decree and filing of a bill of costs did not amount to execution. The applicant did not prove substantial loss would result if the stay was not granted, nor did she provide security for due performance. The appeal was found not to have a likelihood of success, as the matter had already been determined and was res judicata. The applicant's grievances could be addressed through…
Source excerpt
Namiika v Sebunya & Others (Miscellaneous Application 2 of 2023) [2024] UGHCFD 12 (22 February 2024)
The High Court held that a taxing master should not dismiss an entire bill of costs solely because counsel lacked a practising certificate; only directly tainted costs may be disallowed.
Ekanya v Nyaketcho (Miscellaneous Appeal 291 of 2023) [2023] UGHC 106 (20 November 2023)
The court found that the taxing master erred in awarding Ugx. 40,000,000 as instruction fees for a petition dismissed on a preliminary point of law. Rule 6 of the Advocates (Taxation of Costs) Regulations sets a minimum for instruction fees in election petitions, but does not contemplate cases determined solely on preliminary objections. In such cases, Rule 9 applies, requiring a lesser reasonable fee. The court held that the award should reflect the actual work done, which was limited to the preliminary objection, and set aside the excessive instruction fee, awarding Ugx. 6,000,000 instead.…
Source excerpt
Hatangimbabazi and Another v Bagoroza and Another (Taxation Reference 1 of 2023) [2023] UGCommC 118 (7 November 2023)
The court found that Regulation 42 of the Advocates (Remuneration & Taxation of Costs) Regulations only permits separate bills of costs where separate proceedings have been taken and such proceedings are deemed necessary by the taxing officer. In this case, there was no evidence of separate proceedings for each appellant, despite individual instructions. The Supreme Court authority clarified that counsel may not file more than one bill of costs unless the statutory requirements are met. The taxing officer's decision to allow separate bills was therefore procedurally improper and contrary to t…
Source excerpt
Uganda Revenue Authority v Kangaroo Investments Limited (Taxation Reference 1 of 2023) [2023] UGTAT 70 (23 October 2023)
The tribunal found that items such as perusals, drawing and drafting of documents, professional copying, and attendances by counsel and clerk are extensions of instruction fees for which in-house counsel and clerks are paid a salary, and thus cannot be claimed as separate costs by the applicant. The tribunal held itself bound by the Court of Appeal's decision in Hope Mukanusi v Uganda Revenue Authority, which clarified that such items are not recoverable as separate costs for in-house counsel. The tribunal also found that the Deputy Registrar erred in allowing certain items and in awarding th…
Source excerpt
