Wakilii

Non - Performing Assets Recovery Trust v Kagadu Enterprises Limited (Civil Appeal 26 of 1998)

Court of Appeal · [1999] UGCA 56 · 1999 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Reference against the ruling and order of the taxing officer on taxation of costs
Decision
Reference dismissed as misconceived and an abuse of court process

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 applicant brought a reference challenging the taxing officer's assessment of an instruction fee at Shs. 18 million. However, the applicant had already paid the taxed costs in full to the respondent's former advocates, with no evidence of payment under protest and no attempt to stay execution. The court held that the reference should not have been brought because the applicant had accepted the taxing officer's ruling, and could not approbate and reprobate. The conduct amounted to an abuse of court process. The reference was found misconceived and dismissed, with no order as to costs.

Outcome

Reference dismissed as misconceived and an abuse of court process

Facts

The taxing officer taxed the instruction fee of counsel for the respondent at Shs. 18 million on 27 July 1999, against a claim of Shs. 22,800,000. Other items were taxed at Shs. 374,500. The applicant brought a reference challenging the taxation. The respondent company had dispensed with the services of its former advocate, Mr. Ayena Odongo, and its director, served with the hearing notice, did not appear, so the matter proceeded ex parte. Counsel for the applicant did not disclose that the applicant had already paid the taxed costs in full. The respondent had written demanding payment on 2 August 1999, and the applicant replied on 6 August 1999 confirming that costs of Shs. 18,374,500 had been paid to the respondent's lawyers, with a further Shs. 600,000 paid to court brokers. The court discovered the payment by chance after the hearing had concluded.

Issues

  1. Whether a reference against the taxing officer's ruling can be entertained where the applicant has already accepted the ruling and paid the taxed costs in full without protest.

Orders

  • Reference dismissed as misconceived.
  • No order as to costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Reference on Taxation — Effect of Acceptance and Payment of Taxed Costs
A reference against the ruling of a taxing officer cannot be entertained where the party challenging the taxation has accepted the ruling and paid the taxed costs in full without protest and without seeking a stay of execution.
Civil Procedure — Abuse of Process — Approbation and Reprobation
A party cannot approbate and reprobate; bringing a reference to challenge taxed costs after voluntarily paying those costs amounts to an abuse of the court process.

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Non - Performing Assets Recovery Trust v Kagadu Enterprises Limited (Civil Appeal 26 of 1998) [1999] UGCA 56 (31 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.