Ishanga v Bitahwa
Ishanga v Bitahwa (Civil Reference 16 of 2003) [2003] UGCA 14 (11 April 2003)
The Taxing Master misdirected himself by considering the merits of the cross appeal rather than limiting his jurisdiction to whether legitimate work was done in preparation for both the appeal and cross appeal. All such work, including research and filing of authorities, should have been taken into account in assessing instruction fees. The dismissal of the appeal disposed of the entire suit, and all professional work done in preparation for both the appeal and cross appeal attracts costs. The failure to consider these factors resulted in a manifestly low award, amounting to a miscarriage of…
Source excerpt
- Taxation Of Costs
- Instruction Fees
- Cross Appeal Costs
- Appellate Review Of Taxation