Wakilii

Jeshang Popat Shah v Meera Investments Ltd (MISC. APPL. NO. 747 of 2002)

High Court · [2003] UGHC 41 · 2003 Appeal Allowed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Appeal from Deputy Registrar's taxation order under s.61(1) of the Advocates Act 1970
Decision
Matter remitted to taxing officer to tax the bill afresh including the defendant's agents' costs and expenses.

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 held that foreign agents holding a valid power of attorney may act as agents for a party under Order 3 Rule 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules without requiring admission to practice law in Uganda, provided they do not exercise rights of audience. Travel, accommodation, subsistence and other expenses reasonably incurred by such agents in pursuit of justice are recoverable as disbursements. The Deputy Registrar erred in disallowing the costs of the defendant's UK-based agents. The appeal was allowed and the bill ordered to be taxed afresh to include the agents' costs.

Outcome

Matter remitted to taxing officer to tax the bill afresh including the defendant's agents' costs and expenses.

Facts

The defendant and deceased co-owners held property as common tenants. The plaintiff purported to acquire interests from executors of the deceased co-owners' estates and occupied the property, collecting rent without the defendant's consent. The defendant, residing in the United Kingdom, engaged UK-based solicitors and barristers as his agents under power of attorney. These agents attended court proceedings in Uganda on multiple occasions. Following judgment largely in the defendant's favour, the Deputy Registrar sitting as taxing officer disallowed costs incurred by the defendant's UK agents on the ground that they were not licensed advocates in Uganda. The defendant appealed the taxation order under s.61(1) of the Advocates Act 1970.

Issues

  1. Whether costs incurred by the defendant's agents from the United Kingdom were recoverable as disbursements despite the agents not being licensed to practise law in Uganda.
  2. Whether the services provided by Hannebberry & Co. were legitimate, reasonable and necessary for the preparation of the case and therefore taxable as disbursements.
  3. Whether the Deputy Registrar erred in refusing to recognise Hannebberry & Co. as foreign agents whose costs were taxable as disbursements.

Orders

  • Appeal allowed.
  • The bill shall be taxed afresh so that the expenses incurred by the defendant's agents are taken into account.
  • Costs of this appeal/application shall be paid by the plaintiff/respondent.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Agents — Recognition of Foreign Agents — Power of Attorney
Under Order 3 Rule 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules, persons holding powers of attorney authorising them to do certain acts on behalf of parties are recognised as agents. There is no requirement that an agent be of any particular status, occupation or profession. An adult of sound mind holding a valid power of attorney may act as agent regardless of whether they are a lawyer, and regardless of whether words such as 'for Bank Purposes only' appear on the power of attorney if the body of the document clearly appoints them as agents.
Civil Procedure — Costs — Foreign Agents — Right of Audience Distinguished from Agency
A solicitor or barrister from outside Uganda who has not obtained a special practising permit under s.12 of the Advocates Act 1970 cannot have right of audience in Uganda and cannot legally represent any party as an advocate. However, such a person may act as an agent under power of attorney under Order 3 Rule 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules provided they do not address the court on any matter of law or purport to exercise rights of audience.
Civil Procedure — Taxation of Costs — Disbursements — Expenses of Foreign Agents
Under Rule 11 of S.I. 123 of 1982, the taxing officer is empowered to allow expenses which appear to have been necessary or proper for the attainment of justice. Travel, accommodation, subsistence and other reasonable expenses incurred by foreign agents in pursuit of a case are recoverable as disbursements. It is immaterial that the expenses are quoted in foreign currency; the taxing officer can determine the equivalent in local currency.
Civil Procedure — Taxation of Costs — Multiple Agents — Reasonableness
A party is entitled to engage more than one agent where the circumstances of the case justify such engagement. Where a case involves persons residing in multiple continents and where one party has been found to have engaged in fraudulent and oppressive dealings, it is reasonable for the opposing party to engage multiple agents for caution and proper representation.

Legislation cited (6)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Jeshang Popat Shah v Meera Investments Ltd (MISC. APPL. NO. 747 of 2002) [2003] UGHC 41 (22 September 2003)
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.