Wakilii

Fresh Cuts Uganda Limited v Total Energies Marketing Uganda Ltd (Taxation Reference 10 of 2024)

High Court · [2026] UGCOMMC 337 · 2026 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Taxation reference from Deputy Registrar's ex parte taxation decision in Taxation Application No. 155 of 2024 arising from Civil Suit No. 608 of 2023
Decision
Taxation decision set aside; matter remitted for fresh inter partes taxation hearing.

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

Held that the taxation reference was not res judicata as it challenged the taxation decision itself, distinct from the earlier application to set aside default judgment. The Deputy Registrar's ex parte taxation was improper where no pre-taxation meeting had been held and no evidence showed the applicant sabotaged or failed to attend. VAT was erroneously awarded without proof of the law firm's VAT registration certificate. Multiple items in the Bill of Costs lacked dates as required by regulation 47(1)(b), making it impossible to determine whether the services were rendered or to understand the basis for the awards. The taxation decision was set aside and the matter remitted for fresh inter partes hearing.

Outcome

Taxation decision set aside; matter remitted for fresh inter partes taxation hearing.

Facts

Total Energies sued Fresh Cuts for UGX 154,627,820 for petroleum goods and services. Summons were left with Fresh Cuts' gatekeeper on 3 August 2023 after the process server was denied entry. Fresh Cuts filed for leave to defend on 28 August 2023, but on 22 September 2023 the Deputy Registrar entered default judgment despite the pending application. A decree was issued on 31 January 2024. Fresh Cuts later applied to set aside the default judgment and to stay taxation, which the court dismissed on 25 January 2026 for being time-barred. The Deputy Registrar proceeded to tax the Bill of Costs ex parte on 5 September 2024. No pre-taxation meeting had been held. Fresh Cuts then filed the present taxation reference challenging the taxation decision on multiple grounds including absence of a pre-taxation meeting, lack of VAT certificate, missing dates on numerous items, and excessive instruction fees.

Issues

  1. Whether this Application is res judicata for having been determined in Miscellaneous Application No. 1017 of 2024.
  2. Whether there are grounds for setting aside the decision in Taxation Application No. 0155 of 2024.
  3. What are the remedies available to the parties?

Orders

  • The ex parte taxation decision made in Taxation Application No. 0155 of 2024 is hereby set aside.
  • Execution of the taxed Bill of Costs is stayed.
  • The Bill of Costs in Taxation Application No. 0155 of 2024 be fixed for hearing afresh inter partes.
  • Costs of this Application are awarded to the applicant.

Rules and key headnotes

Res Judicata — Taxation Reference Distinct from Application to Set Aside Default Judgment
A taxation reference challenging the Deputy Registrar's taxation decision is not res judicata merely because the same parties previously litigated an application to set aside the underlying default judgment and stay the taxation proceedings. The two applications arise from different facts and issues: one concerns the validity of the judgment itself, the other the correctness of the taxation.
Taxation of Costs — Requirement for Pre-Taxation Meeting
Regulation 13A of the Advocates (Remuneration and Taxation of Costs) (Amendment) Regulations 2018 requires that advocates for respective parties jointly identify agreed costs before taxation. Holding a pre-taxation meeting is a procedural requirement, save where there is frustration by any party. An ex parte taxation conducted without a pre-taxation meeting and without evidence that a party sabotaged the meeting or failed to attend the hearing is improper.
Taxation of Costs — VAT Certificate as Precondition to VAT Award
Before a taxing officer awards VAT on legal costs, a VAT certificate must be presented as proof of counsel's law firm's VAT registration status. An award of VAT in the absence of such certificate is erroneous.
Taxation of Costs — Bills Must Bear Dates of Services Rendered
Regulation 47(1)(b) of the Advocates (Remuneration and Taxation of Costs) Regulations requires that Bills of Costs for taxation contain the date on which each service charged for was rendered. Without dates, it is difficult to determine whether the event for which a claim is made ever took place, and parties are denied the right to know the considerations upon which the taxing officer's discretion was exercised. Taxing a Bill without dates on items where dates should be indicated is erroneous.
Taxation of Costs — Judicial Exercise of Discretion
Taxation of costs is not an exact science and is a matter of judicial opinion as to what amount is reasonable given the circumstances of the case. The court will interfere with the taxing officer's award if the officer erred in principle, if the award is manifestly excessive as to indicate exercise of a wrong principle, or if exceptional circumstances justify intervention. The taxing officer must be able to justify the decision and parties have a right to understand the considerations upon which discretion was exercised.

Legislation cited (19)

Cases cited (16)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Fresh Cuts Uganda Limited v Total Energies Marketing Uganda Ltd (Taxation Reference 10 of 2024) [2026] UGCommC 337 (10 May 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.