Wakilii

Equator Touring Services Ltd v Kampala Capital City Authority (Civil Appeal No. 13 of 2016)

High Court · [2017] UGHCEBD 8 · 2017 Appeal Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Appeal from taxation of costs by Taxing Master in garnishee proceedings
Decision
Taxation decision upheld; appeal dismissed

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 High Court upheld the Taxing Master's decision to reduce the Applicant's claimed costs from UGX 33,296,400 to UGX 5,985,000. The court held that the Taxing Master correctly applied Schedule 6 of the Advocates (Remuneration and Taxation of Costs) Regulations to the unopposed garnishee proceedings. The Applicant's counsel had claimed excessive amounts in disregard of the prescribed rules. If higher instruction fees were sought, counsel should have applied for a certificate from the Registrar specifying an increased percentage. The appeal was dismissed with no order as to costs.

Outcome

Taxation decision upheld; appeal dismissed

Facts

The Applicant, a decree holder in garnishee proceedings (EMA 1943/16), obtained a garnishee order nisi on 14 September 2016, which was made absolute on 23 September 2016 against Stanbic Bank (U) Ltd, with the Respondent as judgment debtor. The Respondent did not appear at the garnishee proceedings. Costs were awarded to the Applicant. Counsel filed a Bill of Costs on 20 September 2016 claiming UGX 33,296,400. The Taxing Master taxed off UGX 20,311,400, allowing only UGX 5,985,000. The Applicant appealed, arguing the award was manifestly inadequate and that the Taxing Master failed to follow precedent cases where higher instruction fees were awarded in matters involving similar amounts (around UGX 200,000,000). The Respondent was not served with the appeal and did not participate in the proceedings.

Issues

  1. Whether the Taxing Master exercised his discretion judiciously in taxing the Applicant's Bill of Costs.
  2. Whether the costs awarded were manifestly inadequate, unfair and unreasonable.
  3. Whether the Taxing Master applied the doctrine of precedent and principles of taxation.

Orders

  • The Taxation decision of the Registrar is upheld.
  • The reference is dismissed.
  • The Applicant to bear its own costs of the application.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Taxation of Costs — Appellate Interference with Taxing Master's Discretion
An appellate court will only interfere with the decision of a Taxing Master where it is proven that the Taxing Master exercised his or her discretion injudiciously or misdirected himself or herself on the law.
Civil Procedure — Taxation of Costs — Application of Advocates (Remuneration and Taxation of Costs) Regulations
Where a Bill of Costs relates to unopposed garnishee proceedings, the Taxing Master must apply the prescribed rates in Schedule 6 of the Advocates (Remuneration and Taxation of Costs) Regulations, and claims substantially exceeding those rates may properly be taxed off.
Civil Procedure — Taxation of Costs — Application for Enhanced Instruction Fees
Where counsel wishes to claim instruction fees higher than the prescribed rates, counsel must apply to the Registrar before whom the matter was heard for a certificate specifying the fraction or percentage by which the instruction fees should be increased, pursuant to Regulation 1(ix) of the Advocates (Remuneration and Taxation of Costs) Regulations.

Legislation cited (10)

  • Advocates Act s.62(1)
  • Advocates (Taxation of Costs) (Appeals and References) Regulations Regulation 3
  • Advocates (Remuneration and Taxation of Costs) Rules Rule 2
  • Advocates (Remuneration and Taxation of Costs) Rules Rule 3.7
  • Advocates (Remuneration and Taxation of Costs) Regulations Schedule 6 Regulation 1(vii)
  • Advocates (Remuneration and Taxation of Costs) Regulations Schedule 6 Regulation 1(ix)
  • Advocates (Remuneration and Taxation of Costs) Regulations Schedule 6 Regulation 2(a)
  • Advocates (Remuneration and Taxation of Costs) Regulations Schedule 6 Regulation 3
  • Advocates (Remuneration and Taxation of Costs) Regulations Schedule 6 Regulation 5
  • Advocates (Remuneration and Taxation of Costs) Regulations Schedule 6 Regulation 6

Cases cited (3)

  • National Insurance Corporation v Pelican Services Ltd (Civil Reference No. 13 of 2005)
  • Manharlal Thakkar v Bahati Mark and Kibungo Enterprises (Miscellaneous Appeal No. 188 of 2013)
  • Uganda Revenue Authority v Rock Petroleum Ltd (HCCS No. 707 of 2012)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Equator Touring Services Ltd v Kampala Capital City Authority (Civil Appeal No. 13 of 2016) [2017] UGHCEBD 8 (1 August 2017)
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.