Wakilii

Kabale University & Others V Henry Rwaganika & Another (Misc. Application No. 05 of 2016)

High Court · [2018] UGHC 33 · 2018 Appeal Allowed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Appeal from taxation ruling challenging exparte taxation proceedings
Decision
Taxation ruling set aside and matter remitted to taxing master for fresh hearing interpartes with execution stayed pending rehearing

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 set aside an exparte taxation ruling because the taxing master proceeded without ensuring proper service on the Appellants after their counsel withdrew from representing them. The court held that change of lawyers warranted an adjournment to allow the Appellants to find new representation, and that exparte proceedings could only be justified after satisfying that parties were properly served but failed to attend without good cause.

Outcome

Taxation ruling set aside and matter remitted to taxing master for fresh hearing interpartes with execution stayed pending rehearing

Facts

The Appellants were represented by M/s. Bakiza & Co. Advocates in Misc. Cause No. 145 of 2014 where the Respondents were awarded costs. The Respondents filed for taxation before the taxing master and served hearing notices on M/s. Bakiza & Co. Advocates, who refused to acknowledge service. On the same day as the taxation hearing, 23rd March 2016, M/s. Bakiza & Co. Advocates wrote to court stating they no longer represented the Appellants and that service should be made directly on the Appellants. The taxing master proceeded exparte and awarded costs of UGX 15,000,000 as instruction fees and UGX 121,170,000 for items 2-150 of the bill. The Appellants appealed, contending they were denied the right to be heard and that the amounts were excessive.

Issues

  1. Whether the taxing master properly proceeded exparte to award costs to the Respondents when the Appellants' counsel had withdrawn and no proper service was effected on the Appellants directly.
  2. Whether the amounts awarded by the taxing master were excessive and exorbitant.

Orders

  • Taxing master's exparte taxation award set aside.
  • File remitted to the taxing master for fresh taxation hearing interpartes.
  • Execution proceedings stayed until fresh taxation hearing completed.
  • Each party to bear its own costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Taxation of Costs — Service Requirements — Exparte Proceedings
Where counsel for a party withdraws from representation and notifies the court and opposing party of the withdrawal, there is no proper service on that party if subsequent hearing notices are served only on the withdrawn counsel. The taxing master must satisfy himself that the party was effectively served within the requirements of the law before proceeding exparte.
Taxation of Costs — Adjournments — Change of Lawyers
When a party's counsel withdraws from representation, especially when the taxation hearing has been fixed for the first time, the taxing master ought to adjourn the hearing to give the party an opportunity to find new lawyers or adequately prepare their defence.
Taxation of Costs — Exparte Proceedings — Preconditions
A taxing master can only proceed exparte after satisfying himself or herself that parties were properly summoned or served for hearing but failed to attend court without good cause.

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Kabale University & Others V Henry Rwaganika & Another (Misc. Application No. 05 of 2016) [2018] UGHC 33 (21 December 2018)
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.