Wakilii

Masiko v Magara and 4 Others (Civil Appeal 39 of 2024)

High Court · [2025] UGHC 108 · 2025 Appeal Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Appeal from a ruling of the Chief Magistrate's Court dismissing preliminary objections to taxation of a bill of costs
Decision
Appeal dismissed; taxation of bill of costs may proceed subject to limitation on instruction fees for period prior to filing of notice of instructions

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 dismissed the appeal against a ruling allowing taxation of a bill of costs. The Court held that the memorandum of appeal was filed within time when excluding the period taken by the lower court to prepare the record. Where counsel acts without filed instructions but the client does not object, representation is valid for taxation purposes, though instruction fees cannot be claimed for the pre-instruction period. An appellate court's finding that the trial magistrate was justified in dismissing an application with costs addresses and upholds the costs order.

Outcome

Appeal dismissed; taxation of bill of costs may proceed subject to limitation on instruction fees for period prior to filing of notice of instructions

Facts

The Respondents filed a bill of costs in Miscellaneous Application No. 24 of 2021. During taxation, the Appellant raised preliminary objections. The trial Acting Chief Magistrate dismissed the objections and allowed taxation to proceed. The Appellant appealed on grounds including that the bill was filed by Smak & Co. Advocates without proper instructions, that the issue of costs had been addressed by a prior appeal (Civil Appeal No. 46 of 2023), and that taxation should not be allowed. The Respondents raised a preliminary objection that the memorandum of appeal was filed out of time. The Appellant had filed a notice of appeal on 18 July 2024 and requested certified proceedings on the same date. The memorandum of appeal was filed on 26 September 2024, and the record was certified on 10 October 2024.

Issues

  1. Whether the memorandum of appeal was filed within time or whether leave to file out of time was required.
  2. Whether there was an error in the Respondents' bill of costs being filed by Smak & Co. Advocates without instructions.
  3. Whether the trial Acting Chief Magistrate erred in finding that the issue of costs in Misc. Application No. 24 of 2021 was addressed by Civil Appeal No. 46 of 2023.
  4. Whether the Appellant is entitled to the remedies sought.

Orders

  • Preliminary objection to the competence of the appeal overruled with costs.
  • Appeal dismissed.
  • No order as to costs of the appeal since the appeal concerns a bill of taxation filed by counsel without instructions at the time.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Appeals — Time Limits — Exclusion of Time Taken to Prepare Record
In computing the period of limitation for filing a memorandum of appeal under Section 79(1) of the Civil Procedure Act, the time taken by the court in making a copy of the decree or order appealed against and the proceedings upon which it is founded shall be excluded pursuant to Section 79(2) of the Civil Procedure Act.
Civil Procedure — Costs — Taxation — Advocate Acting Without Instructions
Where an advocate represents a party and files a bill of costs without having filed a notice of instructions on record, but the party does not object or challenge the representation, the court is justified in allowing taxation to proceed. However, the advocate would not be entitled to instruction fees or costs for actions during the period prior to instructions being filed on record.
Civil Procedure — Costs — Appellate Court Affirmation of Costs Order
Where an appellate court finds that a trial court was justified in dismissing an application with costs, this constitutes a determination that upholds the costs order. The costs order is thereby addressed and maintained, entitling the successful party to proceed with taxation of the bill of costs.

Legislation cited (5)

Cases cited (2)

  • Selle v Associated Motor Boat Co [1968] EA 123
  • Banco Arabe Espanol v Bank of Uganda [1999] 2 EA 22

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Masiko v Magara and 4 Others (Civil Appeal 39 of 2024) [2025] UGHC 108 (31 January 2025)
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.