Wakilii

Jaber & Anor v Global Hardwares Company Limited (CIVIL APPEAL No. 0028 OF 2016)

High Court · [2016] UGHCCD 91 · 2016 Appeal Allowed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Appeal from taxation of costs arising from Civil Appeal No. 0031 of 2011
Decision
Taxation award varied; instruction fees reduced from UGX 9,000,000 to UGX 3,000,000

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

Held that the Taxing Officer erred in principle by placing undue emphasis on the need to attract new recruits to the profession while failing to balance other taxation considerations. The award of UGX 9,000,000 as instruction fees was manifestly excessive for an appeal involving ordinary legal issues regarding tenancy rights where written submissions totalled 19 pages and research was not extensive. The court reduced instruction fees to UGX 3,000,000, noting that the claimed UGX 30,000,000 nearly equalled six years' rent for the premises in dispute and was unnecessary exaggeration. Appeal allowed.

Outcome

Taxation award varied; instruction fees reduced from UGX 9,000,000 to UGX 3,000,000

Facts

The respondent executed a one-year tenancy agreement with Uganda Railways Corporation for premises in Arua Municipality at annual rent of UGX 5,400,000. The appellants were occupying the premises under a prior 2005 tenancy agreement and refused to vacate. The respondent sued for eviction in the Chief Magistrate's Court and succeeded. The appellants appealed to the High Court, which dismissed their appeal on 3 April 2013 with costs. The respondent's costs on appeal were taxed and allowed at UGX 10,878,000 on 25 August 2016, including instruction fees of UGX 9,000,000 (reduced from a claim of UGX 30,000,000). The appellants appealed the taxation, arguing that the instruction fees were excessive. The appeal was disposed of by written submissions totalling approximately 19 pages with citation of ordinary authorities on privity of contract, locus standi, and cause of action.

Issues

  1. Whether the Taxing Officer applied wrong principles in assessing instruction fees at UGX 9,000,000.
  2. Whether the instruction fees awarded were manifestly excessive.

Orders

  • Award of Taxing Officer set aside.
  • Instruction fees substituted with an award of UGX 3,000,000.
  • Rest of the sums in the bill of costs to remain as taxed by the Taxing Officer.
  • Costs of this appeal awarded to the appellant.

Rules and key headnotes

Taxation of Costs — Interference by Judge — Principles
A judge will not interfere with the Taxing Officer's assessment of costs save in exceptional cases where it is shown that the Taxing Officer applied a wrong principle, or where the award is manifestly excessive or manifestly low such that it can be inferred that a wrong principle was applied, and only where the error substantially affected the decision on quantum and would cause injustice to uphold the award.
Taxation of Costs — Instruction Fees — Error of Principle
A Taxing Officer commits an error of principle when awarding instruction fees if undue emphasis is placed on one factor (such as the need to attract recruits to the profession) at the expense of other mandatory considerations including the need to ensure costs do not confine access to justice to the wealthy, fair reimbursement of the successful litigant, and consistency in awards.
Taxation of Costs — Instruction Fees — Enhanced Awards Based on Complexity
Where a Taxing Officer awards an unusually high instruction fee on account of novelty, complexity, or considerable industry by counsel, the complex elements must be specified cogently and with conviction. The nature of forensic responsibility, any novelty, and details of time-consuming industry or large volumes of documentation must be set out clearly and specifically. Assumption that a bulky file indicates extensive research without examination of whether the documents relate to the actual proceedings constitutes an error.
Taxation of Costs — Instruction Fees — Proportionality to Subject Matter
In assessing instruction fees, the value and nature of the subject matter are relevant considerations. Where the dispute involves annual rent of UGX 5,400,000 and ordinary legal issues of privity of contract and tenancy rights, an instruction fee claim of UGX 30,000,000 (nearly six years' rent) amounts to unnecessary exaggeration and is disproportionate to the matter.
Access to Justice — Role of Legal Costs
While advocates are entitled to reasonable remuneration and may take a business approach to legal practice, they must be mindful of the wider social implications of their role in access to justice. Courts should be mindful of the chilling effect of excessive costs on access to justice, particularly in a country of mainly impoverished citizens. Taxing Officers must balance the need to keep practitioners thriving with the duty not to allow costs to become so high that courts remain accessible only to the wealthy.

Legislation cited (7)

Cases cited (6)

  • Premchand Raichand Ltd and Another v Quarry Services of East Africa Ltd and others [1972] EA 162
  • Bank of Uganda v Banco Arabe Espanol (Supreme Court Civil Application No. 23 of 1999)
  • First American Bank of Kenya v Shah and Others [2002] 1 EA 64
  • Thomas James Arthur v Nyeri Electricity Undertaking [1961] EA 492
  • Republic v Minister of Agriculture and 2 others Ex parte Samuel Muchiri W'Njuguna and others [2006] 1 EA 359
  • Lanyero and Another v Lanyero (Court of Appeal Taxation Civil Reference No. 225 of 2013)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Jaber & Anor v Global Hardwares Company Limited (CIVIL APPEAL No. 0028 OF 2016) [2016] UGHCCD 91 (10 November 2016)
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.