Wakilii

Democratic Party and Another v Attorney General of Republic of Uganda Sued in Representative Capacity (Taxation Reference No.3 of 2013)

East African Court of Justice · [2013] EACJ 155 · 2013 Taxation Reference Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Taxation Reference challenging the Taxing Officer's ruling on taxed costs arising from Reference No. 6 of 2011 and Application No. 6 of 2011
Decision
Taxation Reference dismissed; Taxing Officer's ruling of 3 May 2013 upheld in its entirety.

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 East African Court of Justice upheld the Taxing Officer's ruling which awarded USD 51,556 in taxed costs. The Court found no basis to interfere with the Taxing Officer's discretionary award of instruction fees and getting up fees, holding that the case was distinguishable from the Anyang' Nyong'o precedent and that the Taxing Officer had properly applied the East African Court of Justice Rules of Procedure.

Outcome

Taxation Reference dismissed; Taxing Officer's ruling of 3 May 2013 upheld in its entirety.

Facts

The Applicants, Democratic Party and its legal advisor Mukasa Fred Mbidde, sought to challenge elections to the East African Legislative Assembly by filing Reference No. 6 of 2011 and Application No. 6 of 2011 seeking to restrain elections under allegedly unlawful parliamentary rules. The Court granted a temporary injunction, and the rules were subsequently amended before elections proceeded. Following the conclusion of the substantive matter, the Taxing Officer taxed the Applicants' Bill of Costs and awarded USD 51,556 in total taxed costs, including USD 15,000 plus VAT as instruction fees. The Applicants challenged this award as manifestly inadequate, seeking an award comparable to the USD 2,033,164.99 granted in the Anyang' Nyong'o case. They also challenged the disallowance of various specific items in their Bill of Costs.

Issues

  1. Whether the Taxing Officer's award of USD 15,000 plus 18% VAT (USD 2,700) as instruction fees was manifestly inadequate and in contravention of the East African Court of Justice Rules of Procedure.
  2. Whether the Taxing Officer erred in disallowing instruction fees and getting up fees for preparing the Reference and interlocutory Application separately.
  3. Whether the Taxing Officer wrongly disallowed various items in the Bill of Costs including costs of drawing up documents, perusing documents, attending to witnesses, service of submissions, and commissioning documents.

Orders

  • The Taxation Reference is disallowed.
  • Each party to bear their own costs of the Reference.

Rules and key headnotes

Taxation of Costs — Principles Governing Awards
In taxing costs, the taxing officer must balance several principles: costs should not rise to such a level as to confine access to courts to the wealthy; a successful litigant ought to be fairly reimbursed for the costs incurred; the general level of remuneration must attract recruits to the legal profession; and there should be consistency in awards. There is no mathematical formula; each case must be decided on its own merits. The court will only interfere when the award is so high or so low as to amount to an injustice.
Taxation of Costs — Perusal of Documents
An advocate is not entitled to charge for perusing documents drawn by himself. Perusal fees may only be claimed for documents drawn by the opposing party. Perusal of one's own documents falls within instruction fees.
Taxation of Costs — Getting Up Fees
Under Rule 2 of the taxation schedule of the East African Court of Justice Rules of Procedure, in any case in which issues for trial are joined by the pleadings, a fee for getting up and preparing the case for trial shall be allowed in addition to the instruction fee and shall be not less than one quarter of the instruction fee allowed on taxation.
Taxation of Costs — Service of Documents Distinguished from Court Attendance
Service of documents cannot be charged under court attendances. Attendance and service are charged separately under the taxation rules. Where an advocate serves written submissions on opposing counsel, this constitutes service of documents, not court attendance.
Taxation of Costs — Proof of Disbursements
Under Rule 4(2) of the 3rd Schedule of the East African Court of Justice Rules of Procedure, receipts for disbursements must be produced to the Taxing Officer and copies served on the other party at least fourteen days before taxation. Payment vouchers from an advocate's own law firm do not satisfy this requirement.
Taxation of Costs — Precedent Distinguished
A taxation award in a complex case involving eleven applicants, six respondents, multiple interlocutory applications, and elections already conducted under impugned rules is not binding precedent for a simpler case with two applicants, one respondent, and no elections yet conducted. Each taxation must be assessed on the circumstances and complexity of the particular case.

Cases cited (7)

  • Premchand Raichand Ltd v Quarry Services of East Africa Ltd (No. 3) [1972] EA 162
  • Prof. Peter Anyang' Nyong'o v Attorney General of Kenya (Reference No. 1 of 2006)
  • Kenya Ports Authority v Modern Holdings Ltd (Taxation Reference No. 4 of 2010)
  • Attorney General of Kenya v Prof. Peter Anyang' Nyong'o (Taxation Reference No. 5 of 2010)
  • Bank of Uganda v Banco Arabi Espaniol (Application No. 2 of 1999)
  • Taxation Case No.6 of 2008
  • EACJ's Appeal No.1 of 2002

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Democratic Party and Another v Attorney General of Republic of Uganda Sued in Representative Capacity (Taxation Reference No.3 of 2013) [2013] EACJ 155 (13 September 2013)
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.