Wakilii

Nsungwa & Another v Manyire (Taxation Appeal 1 of 2024)

High Court · [2024] UGHC 939 · 2024 Appeal Partly Allowed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Taxation appeal from taxation ruling by Deputy Registrar in dispute arising from costs awarded in settled civil suit
Decision
Taxation appeal partly allowed; instruction fees award of UGX 5,000,000 upheld; transport expenses allowed at UGX 600,000 in lieu of disallowed receipts

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

On taxation appeal challenging instruction fees and transport expenses claimed under a costs order: Held that where a matter settles by consent before full trial, instruction fees must be commensurate with work done and a taxing officer correctly exercises discretion to award a fraction of full instruction fees. Held further that receipts issued on dates when no court business occurred raise presumption of forgery and cannot support reimbursement claims, but party-to-party transport costs should be allowed at public rate where court attendance proved.

Outcome

Taxation appeal partly allowed; instruction fees award of UGX 5,000,000 upheld; transport expenses allowed at UGX 600,000 in lieu of disallowed receipts

Facts

The respondent sued the appellants for recovery of land valued at UGX 341,300,000 (being the value of developments on the land). The parties settled by consent before full trial with costs to the appellants. The appellants filed a bill of costs claiming instruction fees of UGX 50,000,000 and transport/medical expenses under Items 32-37 totalling approximately UGX 4,200,000 supported by receipts. The Deputy Registrar allowed instruction fees at UGX 5,000,000 on the ground that the matter settled without full trial and disallowed Items 32-37 finding the receipts unsupported. The receipts for transport were issued by Golden Innovations International Ltd and a medical clinic, but many were dated on days when no court hearing occurred or before the suit was filed. Motor vehicle searches showed the vehicles cited in receipts were registered to individuals, not the company named in the receipts.

Issues

  1. Whether the learned Deputy Registrar erred in law and fact by taxing instruction fees at UGX 5,000,000.
  2. Whether the learned Deputy Registrar erred in law and fact by disallowing transport and medical expenses claimed under Item Nos. 32-37 of the appellants' bill of costs.

Orders

  • The decision of the learned Deputy Registrar allowing Item No. 1 of the appellants' bill of costs at UGX 5,000,000 is upheld.
  • Items 32-37 of the appellants' bill of costs are allowed at a total public rate of UGX 600,000.
  • Each party shall bear its own costs of this appeal.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Taxation of Costs — Instruction Fees — Calculation Where Suit Settled by Consent
Instruction fees grow as a suit proceeds and an advocate who only files pleadings and makes a few appearances before settlement cannot be remunerated the same way as one who takes a case through full trial; where a matter settles by consent before full trial, a taxing officer is entitled to award instruction fees commensurate with the work actually done, which may be a fraction of the full instruction fees that would have been awarded after trial.
Civil Procedure — Taxation of Costs — Judicial Supervision of Taxing Officer's Discretion
A judge will not interfere with the assessment of a taxing officer except in exceptional cases where a wrong principle of taxation is applied or an error substantially affected the decision on quantum such that upholding the amount allowed would cause injustice; questions of quantum are matters with which the taxing officer is particularly fitted to deal and in which he has more experience than a judge.
Civil Procedure — Taxation of Costs — Disbursements — Evidence Requirements
Where receipts supporting claims for disbursements are dated on days when no court business occurred or before the suit was filed, and show inconsistencies regarding ownership of vehicles used, such receipts raise a high presumption of forgery and it is unsafe to rely on them as documentary evidence to support the claim.
Civil Procedure — Taxation of Costs — Party-to-Party Costs — Limitation to Necessary Expenses
Costs chargeable under taxation as between party and party are limited to all that which was necessary to enable the adverse party to conduct the litigation, and no more; where a party claims private transport and nursing services without justification but court attendance is proved, the taxing master should not disallow transport expenses entirely but should limit them to the public rate for necessary travel.
Civil Procedure — Affidavit Evidence — Representative Capacity
Where there is more than one party to an application, there is no requirement that all must swear affidavits in support or give written authority; the affidavit of one party is sufficient as long as the deponent depones to facts within his or her knowledge and does not purport to swear the affidavit on behalf of the rest without written authority.

Legislation cited (8)

Cases cited (11)

  • Administrator General & 2 Others v Nsubuga Samuel (HCMA No. 230 of 2022)
  • Grace Namulondo & 3 Others v John Jones Serwanga Salango & Others (HCMA No. 1 of 2019)
  • Kaingana v Dado Boubou [1986] HCB 59
  • Samuel Kabagambe Ntungwa & 2 Others v Florence Kekibuga Ntungwa (HCMA No. 110 of 2022)
  • Esemu Nicholas & Another v Mwitanirwa Charles (HCMA No. 952 of 2020)
  • Joreth v Kigano [2002] 1 EA 92
  • Simbamanyo Estates Ltd & Another v Equity Bank Uganda Ltd & 2 Others (HCCA No. 16 and 24 of 2021)
  • Bank of Uganda v Banco Arabe Espanol (Civil Appeal No. 23 of 1999)
  • Lumweno & Co Advocates v Transafrica Assurance Company Ltd (CACA No. 95 of 2004)
  • Auditor General v Ocip Moses and Others (Taxation Reference No. 89 of 2014)
  • Electoral Commission v Kidega Nabinson James (HCCA No. 76 of 2016)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Nsungwa & Another v Manyire (Taxation Appeal 1 of 2024) [2024] UGHC 939 (20 September 2024)
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.