Wakilii

AIDS Support Organisation Uganda Limited v Susan Sirama (Miscellaneous Application 50 of 2026)

Industrial Court · [2026] UGIC 34 · 2026 Appeal Allowed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Appeal against a taxation order arising from a costs award limited to severing impugned affidavit paragraphs
Decision
Taxation order set aside and substituted with a reduced sum of UGX 300,000

Observed later treatment

No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.

Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains good law.

AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions—always read the source judgment before relying on it.

Holding

The court held that where a costs order limits liability to the costs of severing specific paragraphs of an affidavit under Order 19 Rule 3(2) CPR, a Bill of Costs prepared and taxed for the entire application is manifestly erroneous and not in tandem with the court's express orders. The Taxing Officer misread the court's order by taxing the entire application when he was only called to tax the costs of severing four paragraphs. The taxation order was set aside and substituted with a limited award reflecting only the costs of perusing the severed paragraphs.

Outcome

Taxation order set aside and substituted with a reduced sum of UGX 300,000

Facts

The Appellant filed Labour Dispute Miscellaneous Application No. 002 of 2024 seeking leave to appeal a Labour Officer's award. During those proceedings, the Respondent successfully objected to paragraphs 5, 6, 8, and 10 of the Appellant's affidavit as argumentative and in violation of Order 19 Rule 3(1) CPR. The court upheld the objection, severed the offending paragraphs, and ordered the Appellant to pay the costs of severing those paragraphs. The court granted leave to appeal on questions of fact. The Respondent subsequently filed a Bill of Costs for the entire application, which the Taxing Master taxed and allowed at UGX 5,630,000. The Appellant appealed, contending the taxation was erroneous as it covered the whole application rather than only the costs of severing the four specified paragraphs.

Issues

  1. Whether the Bill of Costs in LDMA No. 002 of 2024 was taxed in accordance with the court's orders and the law on taxation.

Orders

  • Appeal allowed.
  • Taxed Bill of Costs and Certificate of Taxation in Taxation Application No. 028 of 2026 dated 16 April 2026 set aside.
  • Taxing order of 16 April 2026 in the sum of UGX 5,630,000 set aside and substituted with an order of UGX 300,000.
  • Respondent awarded UGX 300,000 representing the cost of perusing the severed paragraphs of the affidavit.

Rules and key headnotes

Taxation of Costs — Compliance with Court Orders — Limited Costs Awards
A Bill of Costs must be prepared and taxed in strict accordance with the court's express orders. Where a court limits costs to a specific matter such as the severing of affidavit paragraphs, a Bill drafted for the entire application and taxed as such is manifestly erroneous and not in tandem with the court's orders.
Affidavits — Severance of Argumentative Paragraphs — Costs Liability
Under Order 19 Rule 3(2) CPR, the costs of affidavits containing hearsay or argumentative matter shall be paid by the party filing the affidavit. This provision imposes costs liability on the party filing the offending affidavit and does not entitle the objecting party to costs of the entire application, but only to costs arising from the severance of the impugned paragraphs.
Taxation of Costs — Appellate Interference — Wrong Principles Applied
A court may interfere with a taxation order where the Taxing Officer applied wrong principles or misread the court's orders. Judicial interference is justified where the taxing officer contradicted the actual orders of the court or arrived at a manifestly excessive figure.
Affidavits — Severance as Liberal Approach to Substantive Justice
Severance of affidavits is a liberal approach to substantive justice under Article 126(2)(e) of the Constitution, whereby offending paragraphs of an affidavit may be severed and the remaining paragraphs permitted to support the action, rather than striking out the entire affidavit.

Legislation cited (12)

  • Advocates Act Cap 295 s.68(1)
  • Advocates (Taxation of Costs) Appeal and Reference Regulations SI No. 267-5 Regulation 3
  • Civil Procedure Act Cap 282 s.98
  • Order 19 Rule 3(1) CPR
  • Order 19 Rule 3(2) CPR
  • Advocates (Remuneration and Taxation of Costs) Amendment Regulations SI 7/2018 Regulation 13A
  • Advocates (Remuneration and Taxation of Costs) (Amendment) Regulations 2018 Item 10(1) Sixth Schedule
  • Employment Act s.94
  • Industrial Court Procedure Rules
  • Labour Disputes (Arbitration And Settlement) (Industrial Court Procedure) Rules 2012 Rule 5(1)
  • Constitution of Uganda 1995 Article 126(2)(e)
  • Judicature (Electronic Filing, Service, and Virtual Proceedings) Rules 2025 Rule 46(1) and (2)

Cases cited (12)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.

AIDS Support Organisation Uganda Limited v Susan Sirama (Miscellaneous Application 50 of 2026) [2026] UGIC 34 (27 April 2026)
Source: this page presents Wakilii’s issue analysis and metadata for a publicly reported Ugandan judgment. Any AI-generated summary is marked as such. Judgment text is sourced from the Uganda Legal Information Institute (ulii.org). Wakilii is not affiliated with ULII.