Wakilii

Naggayi v Centenary Rural Development Bank & Another (Taxation Reference 9 of 2024)

High Court · [2025] UGCOMMC 37 · 2025 Appeal Allowed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Taxation reference from High Court Commercial Division taxation proceedings
Decision
Certificate of taxation set aside and matter remitted to another Registrar for retaxation

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 held that where the value of the subject matter is ascertainable from the pleadings, instruction fees must be calculated according to the mandatory scale prescribed in the 6th Schedule of the Advocates (Remuneration and Taxation of Costs) (Amendment) Regulations, 2018. The taxing master erred by assessing instruction fees based on the judgment award rather than the claim value stated in the plaint. The certificate of taxation was set aside and the matter remitted for retaxation.

Outcome

Certificate of taxation set aside and matter remitted to another Registrar for retaxation

Facts

The Plaintiff filed Civil Suit No. 462 of 2021 claiming recovery of UGX 18,205,185 unlawfully debited from her account, special damages of USD 33,630.39 for loss of study sponsorship, and UGX 4,000,000 for travel expenses. Judgment was entered in her favour with costs against the 1st Respondent. She filed Taxation Application No. 002 of 2024 seeking instruction fees of UGX 70,000,000 under Regulation 1(f) of the 6th Schedule. The taxing master awarded only UGX 2,140,519, apparently based on the judgment award of UGX 5,000,000 general damages rather than the original claim value. The Applicant appealed contesting this as manifestly inadequate.

Issues

  1. Whether the taxing master erred in principle when he exercised or applied a wrong principle by failing to take the value of the subject matter into consideration and thereby awarding as costs, instruction fees that were manifestly inadequate.

Orders

  • Appeal allowed.
  • The certificate of taxation in Taxation Application No. 0002 of 2024 is set aside.
  • Taxation Application No. 0002 of 2024 shall be placed before another Registrar for taxation proceedings.
  • Costs of this application awarded to the Applicant.

Rules and key headnotes

Taxation of Costs — Instruction Fees — Calculation Based on Value of Subject Matter
Where the value of the subject matter can be ascertained from the pleadings, instruction fees must be calculated according to the mandatory scale prescribed in the 6th Schedule of the Advocates (Remuneration and Taxation of Costs) (Amendment) Regulations, 2018, regardless of how the suit is ultimately determined.
Taxation Appeals — Standard of Interference with Taxing Master's Decision
A court will seldom interfere with a taxing master's decision save in exceptional cases where it is shown that the taxing master exercised or applied a wrong principle, which is capable of being inferred from an award of an amount that is manifestly excessive or manifestly low, and where the error substantially affected the decision on quantum.
Taxation of Costs — Assessment Based on Judgment vs Pleadings
Assessment of instruction fees based on the judgment only applies where the value of the subject matter was unascertainable from the pleadings; where the value is ascertainable from the plaint, the prescribed scale must be applied to the claim value regardless of the eventual judgment sum.

Legislation cited (4)

Cases cited (4)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Naggayi v Centenary Rural Development Bank & Another (Taxation Reference 9 of 2024) [2025] UGCommC 37 (28 March 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.