Wakilii

Ocira v Okwera (Miscellaneous Application No 11 of 2020)

High Court · [2020] UGHC 155 · 2020 Appeal Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Appeal from Taxing Officer's decision to proceed with taxation of costs without a pre-taxation meeting
Decision
Appeal dismissed with costs to the respondent

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 a pre-taxation meeting under Regulation 13A is not a mandatory precondition that stifles taxation proceedings where parties fail without justification to meet beforehand. The Taxing Officer has discretion to proceed immediately with taxation when no sufficient reason is advanced for failure to identify uncontested items. Proceedings where counsel appeared and raised objections cannot be termed ex-parte. Appeal dismissed.

Outcome

Appeal dismissed with costs to the respondent

Facts

The appellant had filed an application before the trial court which was decided in his favour, but costs were awarded to the respondent. Counsel for the appellant was served with a taxation hearing notice on 11 December 2019. When taxation was scheduled for 20 February 2020, counsel for the appellant argued that parties should first convene a pre-taxation meeting as required by Regulation 13A of The Advocates (Remuneration and Taxation of Costs) (Amendment) Regulations, 2018. The Taxing Officer overruled this objection and directed that taxation proceed. Counsel for the appellant withdrew from the taxation proceedings and filed an appeal the following day, characterising the proceedings as ex-parte taxation and arguing that the pre-taxation meeting was a mandatory step.

Issues

  1. Whether the Taxing Officer erred in proceeding with taxation of costs without first allowing the parties to convene a pre-taxation meeting as required by Regulation 13A of The Advocates (Remuneration and Taxation of Costs) (Amendment) Regulations, 2018.
  2. Whether the taxation proceedings could properly be characterised as ex-parte.

Orders

  • Application dismissed.
  • Costs awarded to the respondent.

Rules and key headnotes

Taxation of Costs — Pre-taxation Meeting — Discretion of Taxing Officer
Regulation 13A of The Advocates (Remuneration and Taxation of Costs) (Amendment) Regulations, 2018 places the burden on parties to take the initiative to meet and agree on uncontested items, ideally before the date fixed for taxation. The Taxing Officer has discretion either to accord parties time to convene such a meeting if persuaded by sufficient reason for their failure, or to proceed immediately with taxation where no sufficient reason is advanced.
Taxation of Costs — Ex-parte Proceedings — Definition
An order made on an application in the presence of counsel for both parties cannot be correctly termed ex-parte. Where a party's advocate appears, raises an objection which is overruled, and subsequently withdraws, the proceedings are not ex-parte since there was appearance on behalf of that party at the time the order was made.
Appeals from Taxing Officer — Procedure and Requirements
Under section 62(1) of The Advocates Act and Regulation 3 of The Advocates (Taxation of Costs) (Appeal and References) Regulations, an appeal from a Taxing Officer's decision must be by way of summons in chambers supported by affidavit, setting forth in consecutively numbered paragraphs particulars of the matters in which the Taxing Officer is alleged to have erred.

Legislation cited (5)

Cases cited (2)

  • Jesse Kimani v McConnell [1966] EA 547
  • Din Mohamed v Lalji Visram & Co (1937) 4 EACA 1

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Ocira v Okwera (Miscellaneous Application No 11 of 2020) [2020] UGHC 155 (23 July 2020)
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.