Mulindwa T a Mulindwa Associates and Co. Advocates v Baliruno (Miscellaneous Application 4 of 2020)
Observed later treatment
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 granted leave to an advocate to file and tax an advocate-client bill of costs against a former client. Where no agreement exists on payment terms for legal services rendered, the law gives a taxing officer jurisdiction to examine the work carried out by the advocate to determine recoverable costs. An advocate is entitled to remuneration for professional services rendered regardless of whether the client disputes payment, provided the bill of costs was properly served.
Outcome
Application allowed — leave granted to file advocate-client bill of costs and matter referred to taxation
Facts
On 14 July 2016, the respondent client instructed the applicant advocate to redeem property comprised in Block 447 Plot 251. The applicant filed Miscellaneous Application No. 586 of 2016 to add the respondent as a party and Originating Summons No. 005 of 2016. Following dismissal of the application, the applicant filed Miscellaneous Application No. 262 of 2018 seeking leave to appeal and No. 295 of 2018 for stay of execution. The applicant subsequently served a bill of costs on the respondent, who refused to acknowledge service. The respondent claimed to have paid UGX 25,000,000 in instruction fees and disbursements, but produced no receipts or evidence. The applicant denied receiving any payment and sought leave to file and tax an advocate-client bill of costs. No written agreement existed as to payment terms for the legal services rendered.
Issues
- Whether the Applicant has raised sufficient grounds for leave to file an Advocate client bill of costs to be granted?
- What remedies are available?
Orders
- Leave is granted to the Applicant to file an Advocate/Client bill of costs.
- The Advocate/Client bill of costs be taxed.
- The Applicant is granted costs of this application.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (5)
Cases cited (4)
- Ondoma Samuel t/a Alaka and Company Advocates v Kana Richard (HCMA No. 16 of 2018)
- M/S Simon Tendo Kabenge Advocates v M/S Mineral Access Systems (U) Ltd (HCMA No. 565 of 2011)
- Kasajja Robert v Nasseriga & Anor (Miscellaneous Cause No. 4 of 2014)
- Byenkya Kihika & Co. Advocates v Gandesha (Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 019 of 2014)
Cases citing this judgment (1)
How later Ugandan judgments in the Wakilii corpus have cited this case. Treatment labels come from Sequitur — Uganda’s citator — each backed by a verbatim span from the citing judgment, and are not an assertion that this case is, or is not, good law.
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.