KSMO Advocates v Libyan Arab Foreign Investment Co. (Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No 030 of 2023)
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 Master erred in awarding instruction fees of UGX 112,000,000 for a matter valued at UGX 36 billion, as the amount was manifestly low and did not follow the computation scales provided in the Advocates (Remuneration and Taxation of Costs) (Amendment) Regulations 2018. The instruction fees were re-computed at UGX 729,220,000 in accordance with the Sixth Schedule of the Regulations. Appeal allowed.
Outcome
Taxing Master's ruling set aside; instruction fees re-computed at UGX 729,220,000
Facts
The Respondent instructed the Applicant law firm to defend it in HCCS No. 250 of 2011, a suit involving recovery of USD 9,500,000 (approximately UGX 36 billion) as commission. The Applicant successfully defended the suit and applied for leave to tax its advocate-client bill of costs. The Taxing Master allowed instruction fees of UGX 112,000,000. The Applicant appealed, contending that the instruction fees were manifestly too low, unfair, and unjust given the subject matter value of UGX 36 billion. The Respondent was served but did not file a reply.
Issues
- Whether there are sufficient grounds for this court to reconsider the amount taxed for instruction fees in item 1.
- What remedies are available to the parties.
Orders
- The taxed amount of UGX 112,000,000 by the Taxing Master under item 1 (instruction fees) is set aside.
- The instruction fees under item 1 are re-computed at UGX 729,220,000.
- The rest of the bill remains unchanged as was taxed.
- Costs of the appeal awarded to the Applicant.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (9)
- Civil Procedure Act Cap.282 s.98
- Civil Procedure Act Cap.282 s.27
- Advocates Act Cap.295 s.57
- Advocates Act Cap.295 s.58
- Advocates Act Cap.295 s.60
- Civil Procedure Rules SI 71-1 Order 52 rules 1 and 3
- Advocates (Remuneration and Taxation of Costs) Regulations SI 67-4
- Advocates (Remuneration and Taxation of Costs) (Amendment) Regulations 2018 SI 267-4 Regulation 13
- Advocates (Remuneration and Taxation of Costs) (Amendment) Regulations 2018 Sixth Schedule
Cases cited (5)
- Makula International Limited v His Eminence Cardinal Nsubuga & Anor (Civil Appeal No. 4 of 1981)
- Kwesiga James v Mugisha Ronald (Miscellaneous Application No. 30 of 2021)
- Makumbi & Anor v Sole Electronic (U) Ltd [1990-1994] 1 EA 306
- Grace Nabbona & 2 Ors v Edna Mukasa & 2 Ors (Miscellaneous Application No. 1072 of 2021)
- Malawi Mobile Limited v The Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA) (Taxation Appeal No. 1 of 2019)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.