Mwesigye v Tumusiime (Taxation Appeal 8 of 2023)
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
Held that the instruction fees of UGX 8,000,000 awarded by the Taxing Master were excessive given the value of the subject matter. The court reduced instruction fees by UGX 2,000,000 to UGX 6,000,000 after applying the scales in the Sixth Schedule of the Advocates (Remuneration & Taxation of Costs) Regulations. The appeal was partly allowed.
Outcome
Bill of costs partially reduced — instruction fees adjusted from UGX 8,000,000 to UGX 6,000,000
Facts
The appellants were unsuccessful in Civil Appeal No. 19 of 2020 arising from a land dispute over a Kibanja in Kiruhura District valued at over UGX 20,000,000. They were condemned to pay the respondent's costs. The respondent filed a bill of costs which the Deputy Registrar taxed and allowed at UGX 38,077,975. Dissatisfied with this award, particularly the instruction fees of UGX 8,000,000, the appellants lodged a taxation appeal arguing that the bill was manifestly excessive, that the Taxing Master did not exercise her discretion judiciously, and that certain items were neither factual nor lawful.
Issues
- Whether the bill of costs taxed at UGX 38,077,975 was manifestly excessive.
- Whether the Taxing Master exercised her discretion judiciously in allowing instruction fees of UGX 8,000,000.
- Whether certain items in the bill of costs were properly allowed according to law and the Advocates (Remuneration & Taxation of Costs) Regulations.
Orders
- Instruction fees reduced from UGX 8,000,000 to UGX 6,000,000.
- Item 3 of the bill of costs adjusted to deduct UGX 2,000,000.
- Appeal partly allowed.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (6)
- Advocates Act Cap 267 s.62(1)
- Civil Procedure Act s.98
- Judicature Act Cap 13 s.33
- Advocates (Taxation of Costs) (Appeals and References) Regulations SI 267-5 Regulation 3
- Advocates (Taxation of Costs) (Appeals and References) Regulations SI 267-5 Regulation 4
- Advocates (Remuneration & Taxation of Costs) Regulations Sixth Schedule Rule 12(2)(b)
Cases cited (5)
- Mbabali Jude v Edward Kiwanuka Sekandi (Constitutional Court Petition No. 28 of 2012)
- Patrick Makumbi and Another v Sole Electrics (U) Ltd [1990-1994] 1 EA 306
- Simba Properties Investment Co. Ltd and Others v Vantage Mezzanine Fund II Partnership and Others (High Court Civil Appeal No. 0002 of 2023)
- Bank of Uganda v Sudhir Ruparelia (Supreme Court Taxation Reference No. 0001 of 2023)
- Bank of Uganda v Banco Arabe Espanol (Civil Application No. 23 of 1999)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.