Uganda Case Law

Dibagh Singh And Bros Limited v M/S Sekabanja & Co. Advocates (Taxation Reference 9 of 2023)

Dibagh Singh And Bros Limited v M/S Sekabanja & Co. Advocates (Taxation Reference 9 of 2023) [2024] UGHCLD 179 (26 June 2024)

Court

HC: Land Division (Uganda)

Case number

Taxation Reference 9 of 2023

Judge

Bernard Namanya, J

The High Court set aside a taxation ruling that allowed an advocate-client bill of costs of UGX 1.175 billion, finding the award manifestly excessive and unsupported by reasons.

• Taxation Of Costs
• Advocate Client Bill
• Instruction Fees
• Judicial Discretion
• Quantum Of Costs
• Taxation-of-costs

Odong-Ocaya v Oweka & 2 Others

Odong-Ocaya v Oweka & 2 Others (Civil Appeal No. 111 of 2019) [2020] UGHC 111 (22 May 2020)

Court

High Court of Uganda

Case number

Civil Appeal No. 111 of 2019

Judge

Stephen Mubiru, J

The High Court set aside a taxed costs award of UGX 62,303,600 and remitted the bill for taxation de novo, finding an error in principle on complexity.

• Taxation Of Costs
• Party And Party Costs
• Judicial Discretion
• Quantum Of Costs
• Ex Parte Taxation
• Taxation-of-costs

Bank of Uganda v Banco Arabe Espanol

Bank of Uganda v Banco Arabe Espanol (Civil Application 4 of 2000) [2000] UGSC 30 (4 May 2000)

Court

Supreme Court of Uganda

Case number

Civil Application 4 of 2000

Judge

Kanyeihamba, JSC

The Supreme Court held that the taxing officer applied the wrong principle by considering the value of the subject matter in assessing instruction fees for an interlocutory application, contrary to paragraph 9(1) of the Third Schedule to the Rules of the Supreme Court. The correct approach is to assess reasonableness based on the instructions and actual work done. The proceedings for stay of execution were straightforward and brief, and the award of Ug. Shs. 10,000,000 was manifestly excessive. The court intervened to reduce the award to Ug. Shs. 3,000,000, emphasizing that costs for interloc…

Source excerpt

• Taxation Of Costs
• Instruction Fee
• Stay Of Execution
• Quantum Of Costs

Kalyanjee v M.M Stores

Kalyanjee v M.M Stores (Civil Appeal No. 24 of 1947) [1950] EACA 630 (1 January 1950)

Court

East African Court of Appeal

Case number

Civil Appeal No. 24 of 1947

Judges

Nihill, C.J

The court held that the Registrar's discretion in taxation of costs, particularly regarding quantum, is generally final and should only be interfered with in exceptional cases where it is clear that a wrong principle has been applied. In this case, although the instruction fee was slightly more than the total value of the suit, the complexity of the issues and the necessity of engaging counsel justified the amount allowed. The withdrawal of the appeal by the defendant did not affect the costs already incurred by the plaintiff. The court found no evidence that the Registrar acted on a wrong pr…

Source excerpt

• Taxation Of Costs
• Quantum Of Costs
• Registrar Discretion
• Complexity Of Issues
• Appeal Against Taxation

Zala v Singh and Others

Zala v Singh and Others (Civil Appeal No. 20 of 1944) [1946] EACA 76 (1 January 1946)

Court

East African Court of Appeal

Case number

Civil Appeal No. 20 of 1944

Judge

Bourke J

The court allowed an appeal against taxation, holding that an excessive instructions fee had been allowed on a wrong principle in a simple costs dispute.

• Taxation Of Costs
• Quantum Of Costs
• Instructions Fee
• Judicial Discretion
• Appeal Procedure
• Taxation-of-costs