Wakilii

Katunda v Atuhaire and Another (Civil Appeal No. 5 06)

Court of Appeal · [2008] UGCA 24 · 2008 Appeal Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Civil appeal from a High Court revision ruling, challenging the order that each party bear its own costs
Decision
Appeal dismissed; High Court order that each party bear its own costs upheld

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 Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal against a High Court order that each party bear its own costs in revision proceedings. While costs ordinarily follow the event under section 27 of the Civil Procedure Act, the court held that the discretion to order otherwise for good reason is judicial and will not be interfered with on appeal absent error of principle. Because the appellant had filed his original suit in a Local Council court lacking jurisdiction, rendering its judgment a nullity, he could not strictly be regarded as a successful party. The judge had exercised his discretion correctly, and the appeal was dismissed with costs to the respondents.

Outcome

Appeal dismissed; High Court order that each party bear its own costs upheld

Facts

The appellant filed a suit against the first respondent for alleged trespass to land in the Local Council I court at Kyobukyera, Bushenyi District, and lost on 25 September 2004. He appealed to the LC II court the next day, but that court declined to hear it as being beyond its jurisdiction. On 27 September 2004 the LC I Chairperson issued a warrant of attachment, handed to the second respondent as court bailiff, to put the first respondent in possession. The appellant then applied to the High Court at Mbarara for revision. The judge set aside the LC I judgment, ordered a fresh hearing in the Bushenyi District Land Tribunal, quashed the warrant of attachment for being issued before expiry of the appeal period, and ordered the status quo ante to prevail, with each party bearing its own costs. The appellant, dissatisfied only with the costs order, appealed.

Issues

  1. Whether the learned trial judge erred when he ordered each party to bear its own costs of the revision proceedings.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed.
  • Costs of the appeal awarded to the respondents.

Rules and key headnotes

Costs — Discretion of Court — Section 27 Civil Procedure Act — Proviso permitting departure from 'costs follow the event'
Although costs ordinarily follow the event under section 27 of the Civil Procedure Act, the proviso confers a wide discretion on the court to order otherwise for good reason connected with the case; that discretion must be exercised judicially.
Appeals — Interference with Exercise of Discretion by Lower Court
An appellate court will not interfere with a lower court's exercise of discretion as to costs unless it is shown that the discretion was exercised unjudicially or on wrong principles, or, where no reasons are given, that the order made was wrong.
Costs — 'Successful Party' — Effect of Proceedings Founded on a Nullity
A litigant whose original suit was filed in a court lacking jurisdiction, rendering its judgment a nullity, cannot strictly be regarded as a successful party entitled to costs notwithstanding partial success on revision.

Legislation cited (5)

Cases cited (4)

  • Donald Campbell v Pollak [1927] A.C. 732
  • Kiska Ltd v De Angelis [1969] EA 6
  • Janmomohamed v Twenthche [1967] EA 26
  • Kampala Land Board v Narandos Rajaram Co (Africa) Ltd (Civil Appeal No. 32 of 2005)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Katunda v Atuhaire and Another (Civil Appeal No. 5 06) [2008] UGCA 24 (11 January 2008)
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.