Wakilii

Mutungirehi v Rwangwande & Group (Civil Misc. Application No. 74 of 1998)

High Court · [1999] UGHC 66 · 1999 Appeal Partly Allowed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Appeal against taxation ruling from Chief Magistrate's Court sitting as taxing officer
Decision
Appeal partly allowed with reductions to taxed bill of 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 High Court dismissed a preliminary objection that the original action was brought by a non-existent party, holding that the objection came too late and that the requirements for proper party joinder were satisfied. On taxation, the court upheld the taxing master's award of costs for an ex parte application under Civil Procedure Act s.27, but reduced awards for counsel's attendance time from six hours to three hours and from twelve hours to six hours, finding the original assessments excessive given the brief nature of the proceedings.

Outcome

Appeal partly allowed with reductions to taxed bill of costs

Facts

The respondent obtained a taxation order from the Chief Magistrate sitting as taxing officer in respect of costs arising from civil proceedings that originated in a Local Committee Court. The original action was brought by Rwangwande and Group against Mutungirehi. The appellant challenged the taxation on multiple grounds, including a preliminary objection raised for the first time on appeal that the respondent party was improperly constituted because 'Group' was not a legal entity capable of suing. The taxation in dispute included costs for an ex parte application for a certificate of urgency, attendance fees for counsel traveling from Bushenyi to Mbarara, and taxation attendance fees. The appellant contended various items were wrongly assessed or awarded.

Issues

  1. Whether the appellant could raise on appeal a preliminary objection not raised in the court below regarding the capacity of the respondent party to sue.
  2. Whether costs should be awarded in respect of an ex parte application where the judge made no specific order as to costs.
  3. Whether the taxing master erred in the assessment of various items on the bill of costs.

Orders

  • Preliminary objection dismissed.
  • Appeal allowed in part.
  • Taxed bill of costs reduced by a total of UGX 450,000.
  • Item 12 reduced from UGX 300,000 to UGX 150,000.
  • Item 23 reduced from UGX 600,000 to UGX 300,000.
  • Each party to bear its own costs of the appeal.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Appeals — New Points of Law — Discretion to Permit Preliminary Objection Not Raised Below
An appellate court has discretion to permit an appellant to raise a new point of law not argued before the lower court, but will exercise that discretion only where satisfied that full justice can be done to the parties, which requires that the matter has been properly pleaded or that the facts bearing upon the new point have been elicited in the court below.
Civil Procedure — Party Joinder — Proceedings Originating in Resistance Committee Courts — Application of Civil Procedure Rules
Where civil proceedings originate in a Local Committee Court and proceed through the appellate structure, the Civil Procedure Rules regarding party joinder do not apply at the institution stage, and any defects in party naming may be cured by the Resistance Committees (Judicial Powers) Statute 1988 s.15(2).
Civil Procedure — Costs — Interlocutory Applications — Award of Costs Where Judge Made No Specific Order
It is neither necessary nor proper for a court to specifically award costs in an interlocutory application; such application is part of the main suit and whoever has to pay the costs finally meets the costs of that application, and costs follow the event under Civil Procedure Act s.27 unless the judge otherwise orders for good cause.
Civil Procedure — Taxation — Assessment of Counsel's Attendance Time — Reduction on Appeal
On appeal from a taxation, the court may reduce an award for counsel's attendance time where the assessment appears excessive in light of the brief nature of the proceedings, even where counsel traveled from outside the court's station.

Legislation cited (6)

  • Advocates Act s.61
  • Advocates (Remuneration and Taxation of Costs) Rules 1982
  • Civil Procedure Act s.27
  • Civil Procedure Rules O.1 r.1
  • Civil Procedure Rules O.1 r.8
  • Resistance Committees (Judicial Powers) Statute 1988 s.15(2)

Cases cited (3)

  • Makula International Ltd v Cardinal Nsubuga (Civil Appeal No. 4 of 1981)
  • The United Marketing Company vs Hasham Kara (1963) E.A.
  • Tanganyika Farmers Association Ltd. vs Unyamwezi Development Corporation Ltd. (1960) E.A. 620

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Mutungirehi v Rwangwande & Group (Civil Misc. Application No. 74 of 1998) [1999] UGHC 66 (24 March 1999)
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.