Wakilii

Mrs.Rosemary Rwabanjangu v George Germany,Francis Behuta (HCT-05-CV-MA-0054.-2005 ) (HCT-05-CV-MA-0054.-2005)

High Court · [2005] UGHC 97 · 2005 Appeal Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Appeal from Deputy Registrar's decision refusing to grant execution on taxed costs from an interlocutory ruling
Decision
Appeal dismissed; appellant cannot execute on previously taxed interlocutory costs

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 held that costs taxed and allowed following an interlocutory ruling do not stand independent of the final judgment's costs order. Where the main suit judgment ordered parties to bear their own costs for reasons stated in the judgment, those reasons preclude recovery of earlier taxed interlocutory costs. The Deputy Registrar had correctly advised waiting for the main suit outcome. The appeal was dismissed with no order as to costs.

Outcome

Appeal dismissed; appellant cannot execute on previously taxed interlocutory costs

Facts

In February 2000, a preliminary objection to a proposed amendment of the plaint was upheld in an interlocutory application. The appellant obtained a bill of costs which was taxed and allowed at Shs. 909,000. The Deputy Registrar, in a letter dated 11 May 2000, advised the appellant's advocates to keep the taxed bill until the main suit was determined, noting that costs in interlocutory matters should normally await the outcome of the main suit. The main suit was subsequently determined with each party ordered to bear their own costs. The appellant then sought to execute on the previously taxed interlocutory costs of Shs. 909,000. The Deputy Registrar refused to grant execution, and the appellant appealed that decision under Order 46 of the Civil Procedure Rules.

Issues

  1. Whether costs taxed and allowed following an interlocutory ruling are independent of costs ordered in the final judgment of the main suit.
  2. Whether the appellant could execute on taxed costs from an interlocutory application when the main suit judgment ordered each party to bear their own costs.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed on all grounds.
  • No order as to costs given the complexity of the issue.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Costs — Interlocutory Costs and Final Judgment Costs Order
Where a main suit judgment orders parties to bear their own costs for stated reasons, those reasons extend to and preclude recovery of costs previously taxed and allowed in interlocutory applications arising from the same suit, notwithstanding that such interlocutory costs were taxed and allowed before the final judgment.
Civil Procedure — Costs — Discretion of Court — Recovery of Interlocutory Costs
Under section 27(1) of the Civil Procedure Act, the court has full discretionary power to determine by whom, out of what property, and to what extent costs are to be paid. While costs in interlocutory matters may be ordered to be paid forthwith or may await the outcome of the main suit, where a Deputy Registrar properly advises that such costs should await determination of the main suit, that advice binds the recovery of those costs to the final costs order.

Legislation cited (3)

Cases cited (1)

  • Devram Nanji Dattani v Haridas Kulidas Dawda (1949) 16 EACA 35

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Mrs.Rosemary Rwabanjangu v George Germany,Francis Behuta (HCT-05-CV-MA-0054.-2005 ) (HCT-05-CV-MA-0054.-2005) [2005] UGHC 97 (1 September 2005)
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.