Wakilii

Kyagonza v Magadu (HCT-12-CV-CA-0027 OF 2017)

High Court · [2017] UGHCCD 168 · 2017 Appeal Partly Allowed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Taxation appeal from Registrar's order in respect of taxation of costs following successful applications in Chief Magistrate's Court and High Court
Decision
Matter remitted to taxing master for continuation of taxation proceedings

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 the Registrar was correct to order splitting of an omnibus bill of costs covering matters from two different courts so that each court handles its own taxation. However, the order for the appellant to pay costs of UGX 260,000 for an adjournment was set aside, as the adjournment arose from delay in availing the written ruling. The appeal succeeded in part and each party was ordered to bear its own costs.

Outcome

Matter remitted to taxing master for continuation of taxation proceedings

Facts

The respondent was successful in two applications: MA No. 96 of 2013 in the Chief Magistrate's Court and Revision Application No. 005 of 2013 in the High Court. He filed a single omnibus bill of costs covering both matters before the Registrar. The appellant raised a preliminary objection to the propriety of a single bill covering matters from two different courts. The Registrar upheld the objection and directed that the bill be split. The appellant appealed this order, seeking to have the entire bill thrown out. The Registrar also ordered the appellant to pay costs of UGX 260,000 for an adjournment, which arose from delay in availing the written ruling. The bill for the magistrate's court matter was subsequently taxed inter parties by the Chief Magistrate.

Issues

  1. Whether the Registrar's order allowing the respondent to file an amended or split bill of costs should be set aside.
  2. Whether the Registrar's order directing the appellant to pay costs of UGX 260,000 before the next taxation hearing should be set aside.

Orders

  • Appeal succeeds in part.
  • Registrar's order to split the bill of costs is upheld.
  • Registrar's order directing appellant to pay costs of UGX 260,000 is set aside.
  • Taxation proceedings to continue to completion before the taxing master.
  • Each party to bear its own costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Taxation of Costs — Bill of Costs — Omnibus Bill for Proceedings in Different Courts
Where a party files a single omnibus bill of costs covering successful applications in two different courts, it is proper for the Registrar to order that the bill be split so that each court handles taxation of costs in respect of the matter that was before it.
Civil Procedure — Taxation of Costs — Costs of the Day — Adjournment
Where an adjournment is sought because a written ruling has not been availed to a party who had indicated intention to appeal, the court may set aside an order for costs of the day on the basis that the delay was not the fault of the party seeking the adjournment.

Legislation cited (2)

  • Advocates Act s.62
  • Advocates (Taxation of Costs) (Appeals and References) Regulations Regulation 3

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Kyagonza v Magadu (HCT-12-CV-CA-0027 OF 2017) [2017] UGHCCD 168 (22 November 2017)
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.