Wakilii

Musoke Muhammadi v Charles Ggingo Mujje (Miscellaneous Application 4 of 2025)

High Court · [2025] UGHC 1327 · 2025 Appeal Partly Allowed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Appeal from taxation ruling and certificate delivered by the Deputy Registrar
Decision
Appeal partly allowed with costs reduced from UGX 35,630,000 to UGX 21,390,000

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 partially allowed the appeal from a taxation ruling, reducing the taxed costs from UGX 35,630,000 to UGX 21,390,000. The court upheld instruction fees of UGX 9,820,000 based on a subject matter value of UGX 230,000,000, but taxed off UGX 14,240,000 for items relating to court attendances that did not occur and work performed by counsel during periods when he lacked a valid practicing certificate, as prohibited by sections 20 and 75 of the Advocates Act.

Outcome

Appeal partly allowed with costs reduced from UGX 35,630,000 to UGX 21,390,000

Facts

The Appellant instituted HCT-06-CV-CS-0037-2017 against the Respondent and others for trespass, breach of contract, and fraudulent misrepresentation relating to a failed land purchase. The High Court dismissed the claim with costs. The Respondent filed a bill of costs claiming UGX 111,870,000, which the Deputy Registrar taxed at UGX 35,630,000. The Appellant appealed, challenging various items including instruction fees and items relating to work done by the Respondent's counsel during periods when he lacked a valid practicing certificate. Evidence from the Chief Registrar confirmed that counsel held practicing certificates for 2017, 2018, 2019, 2023, 2024, and 2025, but not for 2020, 2021, and 2022. The underlying dispute concerned land valued at UGX 230,000,000, with the Appellant having made deposits exceeding UGX 51,000,000 and attempting to exchange his house valued at UGX 230,000,000 for the land.

Issues

  1. Whether the costs presented may be varied by the court.
  2. Whether the instruction fees awarded by the taxing master were excessive in relation to the subject matter.
  3. Whether costs are recoverable for work done by an advocate without a valid practicing certificate.
  4. Whether specific items in the bill of costs were properly taxed by the Deputy Registrar.

Orders

  • The taxed Bill of Costs is reduced from UGX 35,630,000 to UGX 21,390,000.
  • A total of UGX 14,240,000 is taxed off for items awarded in error.
  • The appeal partially succeeds.
  • The Appellant is awarded the costs of this appeal.

Rules and key headnotes

Taxation of Costs — Judicial Interference with Taxing Officer's Assessment
A judge will not interfere with the fee assessed by the taxing officer merely because he or she would have allowed a different amount, save in exceptional circumstances. Judicial interference is justified only where it is shown, expressly or by inference, that the taxing officer applied a wrong principle and thereby arrived at a figure that is manifestly excessive or unduly low, and that upholding the assessment would occasion injustice to one of the parties.
Taxation of Costs — Assessment of Instruction Fees — Determination of Subject Matter Value
Where the value of the subject matter in a claim can be determined from the pleadings or judgment, the award of instruction fees is not discretionary and must be calculated strictly in accordance with the formula set out under the Regulations. The subject matter value must be determined from credible indicators in the pleadings and conduct of the parties, not merely from an initial downpayment or provisional figure.
Legal Practitioners — Practice Without Valid Certificate — Recovery of Costs
An advocate not in possession of a valid practicing certificate who practices as an advocate commits an offence under section 20 of the Advocates Act, and no costs are recoverable in any suit, proceeding or matter in respect of anything done during the period of unlawful practice. The subsequent acquisition of a practicing certificate does not cure the illegality nor entitle the advocate to costs for work done during the period without a valid certificate.
Taxation of Costs — Instruction Fees — Timing of Receipt of Instructions
Instruction fees encompass receiving instructions and performing necessary work in prosecuting or defending a case. Where an advocate possessed a valid practicing certificate at the time instructions were received and the matter was filed, instruction fees are properly billable for that initial act, notwithstanding that the advocate later practiced without a valid certificate during the conduct of the matter.
Taxation of Costs — Disbursements and Attendances — Verification Against Court Record
Where a bill of costs claims fees for court attendances or activities, the taxing officer and appellate court must verify such claims against the court record. Costs claimed for attendances that did not occur or activities not undertaken must be taxed off as having been awarded in error.
Taxation of Costs — Illegality — No Benefit from Unlawful Practice
Guided by the principle that no benefit may accrue from an illegality, costs claimed for transport expenses and other disbursements that are inseparably linked to an advocate's unlawful practice during a period without a valid practicing certificate must be disallowed in their entirety, even where the advocate subsequently obtained a certificate before the matter concluded.

Legislation cited (8)

  • Advocates (Remuneration and Taxation of Costs) (Amendment) Regulations 2018 SI-267-5
  • Advocates (Remuneration and Taxation of Costs) (Amendment) Regulations 2018 SI-267-5 Regulation 37
  • Advocates (Remuneration and Taxation of Costs) (Amendment) Regulations 2018 SI-267-5 Sixth Schedule Item 1(1)
  • Advocates (Remuneration and Taxation of Costs) (Amendment) Regulations 2018 SI-267-5 Sixth Schedule Item 1(1)(a)(g)
  • Advocates (Remuneration and Taxation of Costs) (Amendment) Regulations 2018 SI-267-5 Sixth Schedule Regulation 9(2)
  • Advocates (Remuneration and Taxation of Costs) (Amendment) Regulations 2018 SI-267-5 Sixth Schedule Regulation 10
  • Advocates Act Cap. 295 s.20
  • Advocates Act Cap. 295 s.75

Cases cited (12)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Musoke Muhammadi v Charles Ggingo Mujje (Miscellaneous Application 4 of 2025) [2025] UGHC 1327 (25 November 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.