Wakilii

Magellan Kazibwe Co Advocates v Yako Bank (U) Limited [2023] UGHC 557

High Court · 2023 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for taxation of advocate and client bill of costs arising from High Court civil suit
Decision
Application granted; bill of costs to be taxed by Taxing Officer

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 an advocate's bill of costs bearing the client corporation's official head office stamp with signature is sufficient proof of service on a principal officer absent evidence of forgery or falsity. Further held that an advocate is entitled to recover advocate-and-client costs from their own client when execution of a consent judgment awarding party-and-party costs was frustrated by the client's refusal to fund execution, as advocate-client costs are payable whatever the outcome and independent of court cost awards.

Outcome

Application granted; bill of costs to be taxed by Taxing Officer

Facts

The Applicant law firm was instructed by the Respondent bank to institute HCCS No. 295 of 2017. The Applicant prosecuted the suit and obtained a Consent Judgment and Decree in the Respondent's favor awarding costs of UGX 6,000,000 payable by the defendants. The Applicant attempted to execute the decree but the Respondent refused to fund the execution process. On 21 February 2023, the Applicant served the Respondent with a Demand Notice and an Advocate and Client's Bill of Costs under section 57 of the Advocates Act for settlement within 30 days. The Respondent failed to settle the bill within the statutory period. The Applicant then filed this application for taxation of the bill of costs.

Issues

  1. Whether there was effective service of the Applicant's Bill of Costs and Demand Notice to the Respondent.
  2. Whether the Applicant is entitled to recover costs from the Respondent.

Orders

  • Application allowed.
  • The Applicant's Bill of Costs between them and the Respondent arising out of HCCS No. 295 of 2017 be taxed.
  • Costs of the Application to be borne by the Respondent.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Service of Process — Corporations — Service on Principal Officer
Where a bill of costs bears the official head office stamp of a corporate client with a signature endorsed therein, and the client does not dispute the authenticity of the stamp or signature or adduce evidence of forgery or falsity, the court will find that service was effected on a principal officer of the corporation in accordance with the requirements of the Civil Procedure Rules.
Civil Procedure — Advocate and Client Costs — Preconditions to Recovery — Service of Bill of Costs
Under section 57 of the Advocates Act, no suit may be brought to recover costs due to an advocate until one month after a bill of costs has been delivered in accordance with the requirements of that section, which include that the bill must be signed by the advocate or a partner and delivered to the party to be charged either personally, by registered post, or left at their place of business or dwelling house.
Civil Procedure — Burden of Proof — Service of Documents
The burden of proving service of a bill of costs lies on the advocate who asserts that service was effected, and such proof must be beyond mere assertion, ordinarily by annexing a return of service or affidavit of service stating the time when and manner in which the document was served.
Civil Procedure — Advocate and Client Costs — Nature and Recoverability
Advocate and client costs are costs that an advocate claims from their own client for professional services rendered and disbursements made on behalf of the client. These costs are payable by the client whatever the outcome of the matter for which the advocate's services were engaged and are not dependent upon any award of costs by the court. An advocate is entitled to recover such costs upon taxation even where a consent judgment awarded party-and-party costs against an opposing party, if the client frustrated execution of that judgment.

Legislation cited (7)

Cases cited (5)

  • Byenkya, Kihika & Co. Advocates v Gandesha (Miscellaneous Appeal No. 19 of 2014)
  • Peter Jogo Tabu & Co. Advocates v Waco Fred (HCMA No. 30 of 2007)
  • Roko Construction Limited & 2 Others v Musana Gerald Rego (HCMA No. 161 of 2021)
  • Jovelyn Barugahare v Attorney General (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 28 of 1993)
  • Ondoma v Kana (HCMA No. 0016 of 2018)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Magellan Kazibwe Co Advocates v Yako Bank (U) Limited 2023 UGHC 557 (28 September 2023)
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.