Wakilii

Marwaha v Subhakhan and Another (C.A. 18-1931.)

East African Court of Appeal · [1931] EACA 5 · 1931 Appeal Allowed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Appeal from order as to costs following arbitration award
Decision
Costs order varied in favour of appellants

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 held that a trial judge is not bound by an arbitrator's award as to court costs and must exercise judicial discretion under Order XLIII Rule 13. Where a plaintiff succeeds in recovering a balance after arbitration, costs should follow the event on the Subordinate Court scale. The defendants' counter-claim having failed, they were not entitled to any costs. The appeal was allowed and the costs order varied accordingly.

Outcome

Costs order varied in favour of appellants

Facts

The appellants sued for Sh. 3,702 being the balance due on contracts for sale of sand and lime. The respondents denied liability and counter-claimed Sh. 301/67. The matter was referred to arbitration. The arbitrator found that Sh. 805/83 were due to the plaintiff less Sh. 301/67 for the counter-claim, resulting in a net award of Sh. 503/96 to the plaintiff with interest at 9% from 17 November 1928. The arbitrator recommended that the plaintiff receive costs on the lower Court scale and the defendants receive costs on the higher Court scale. The trial Judge entered judgment in accordance with the arbitrator's recommendation on costs. The plaintiffs appealed the costs order.

Issues

  1. Whether the trial Judge properly exercised judicial discretion as to costs under Order XLIII Rule 13 of the Civil Procedure Rules 1927.
  2. Whether the trial Judge was bound by the arbitrator's recommendation on costs.
  3. Whether costs should follow the event where the plaintiff succeeded in recovering a balance.

Orders

  • Appeal allowed with costs.
  • Judge's order as to costs varied.
  • Plaintiffs to receive costs on the Subordinate Court scale on the basis of a claim for Sh. 503/96.
  • Defendants not entitled to any costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Arbitration under Order of Court — Court's Power to Modify Award on Costs
Where an arbitrator's award deals with court costs, the judge is not bound thereby and must exercise judicial discretion under Order XLIII Rule 13 of the Civil Procedure Rules.
Costs — Judicial Discretion — Exercise of Discretion
A trial judge's discretion as to costs must be exercised judicially and adequate reasons must be given for departing from the general rule that costs follow the event.
Costs — Counter-claim — Failed Counter-claim
Where a plaintiff succeeds in recovering a balance and the defendant's counter-claim fails, the defendant is not entitled to recover any costs, and the plaintiff's success in reducing the claim is reflected in the lower scale of costs recoverable.

Legislation cited (3)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Marwaha v Subhakhan and Another (C.A. 18-1931.) [1931] EACA 5 (1 January 1931)
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.