Jaffer Brothers Limited v Departed Asian Properties Custodian Board (Civil Application 24 of 1999)
Observed later treatment
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
On a reference to the full court under rule 105(7), the Supreme Court considered whether a single justice erred in reducing instruction fees taxed in the applicant's favour from Shs 16,000,000 to Shs 4,000,000. The court held that the single justice wrongly distinguished between interlocutory and substantive proceedings, and wrongly treated written submissions as warranting lower fees than oral argument, when assessing costs. It found that the respondent's conduct had forced the applicant to undertake extensive legal research. The court set aside the single justice's order and substituted an award of Shs 10,000,000 as instruction fees, with costs to the applicant.
Outcome
Single justice's order set aside; instruction fees fixed at Shs 10,000,000 with costs to the applicant.
Facts
Jaffer Brothers, a company whose shareholders and directors were Asians, owned residential premises in Kololo, Kampala. Following the 1972 expulsion of Asians from Uganda, the property was expropriated under the Assets of Departed Asians Decree 1973 and vested in the Custodian Board, which sold it on. After enactment of the Expropriated Properties Act 1982, the applicant successfully applied for return of the property. Litigation followed, culminating in the Custodian Board's appeal to the Supreme Court, which was dismissed with costs to the applicant. The applicant filed a bill of costs of Shs 30,600,000; the taxing officer allowed Shs 16,000,000 as instruction fees for opposing the appeal. The Custodian Board referred the taxation to a single justice, who reduced the instruction fees to Shs 4,000,000. The applicant then referred that decision to the full court.
Issues
- Whether the single justice erred in reducing the instruction fees taxed in the applicant's favour from Shs 16,000,000 to Shs 4,000,000.
- Whether the single justice was right to treat the matter as not complex on the basis that the submissions were written rather than oral.
- Whether the interlocutory or substantive character of the underlying proceedings was a proper criterion for assessing the instruction fees.
- Whether costs of the reference should be awarded.
Orders
- Reference allowed.
- Orders of the single justice set aside.
- Award of Shs 10,000,000 as instruction fees substituted in favour of the applicant.
- Costs of the reference awarded to the applicant.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (4)
- Rules of the Supreme Court rule 105(7)
- Rules of the Supreme Court rule 105(1)
- Civil Procedure Rules Order 1 r.10(2)
- Expropriated Properties Act 1982 s.16
Cases cited (2)
- Makumbi
- Registered Trustees of Kampala Institute v Departed Asians Property Custodian Board [1993]
Cases citing this judgment (3)
How later Ugandan judgments in the Wakilii corpus have cited this case. Treatment labels come from Sequitur — Uganda’s citator — each backed by a verbatim span from the citing judgment, and are not an assertion that this case is, or is not, good law.
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.