Wakilii

Oza v New India Assurance Co. Ltd (C.C. No. 115-1936)

East African Court of Appeal · [1936] EACA 133 · 1936 Appeal Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Review of taxation ruling on costs of interlocutory application
Decision
Registrar's ruling affirmed; taxation of interlocutory costs to await final disposal of suit

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 court upheld the Registrar's ruling that costs of an interlocutory application should not be taxed prior to the final determination of the suit, unless the judge specifically directs immediate taxation and payment. The established practice in the High Court was to conduct only one taxation of costs in an action at its conclusion, consistent with King's Bench Division practice in England.

Outcome

Registrar's ruling affirmed; taxation of interlocutory costs to await final disposal of suit

Facts

The plaintiff brought an action for an account under a contract of agency on 25 August 1936. On 17 September 1936, the defendants applied by motion for an order directing the plaintiff to furnish particulars. The court ordered certain particulars to be furnished and awarded costs of the application to the defendants. The defendants immediately applied to the Registrar to tax these costs. The Registrar refused to tax the costs until the final disposal of the action, stating that the established practice in the High Court was to conduct only one taxation of costs in an action unless the judge specifically directed immediate taxation and payment of costs of an interlocutory application. The defendants appealed this ruling.

Issues

  1. Whether costs of an interlocutory application may be taxed before the final disposal of the action.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed.
  • Registrar's ruling declining to tax the bill of costs of the interlocutory application prior to determination of the suit upheld.
  • Costs to the plaintiff.
  • Costs agreed at Sh. 80.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Taxation of Costs — Timing of Taxation — Interlocutory Applications
Costs awarded on an interlocutory application should not be taxed prior to the final determination of the suit unless the judge specifically directs immediate taxation and payment of such costs.
Civil Procedure — Taxation of Costs — Practice — Single Taxation
The established practice is to have only one taxation of costs in an action at its conclusion, with all interlocutory costs being taxed together with the costs of the main issue unless otherwise directed by the court.

Legislation cited (2)

  • Rules of Court Part XIII Section III r.35
  • Rules of Court Part XIII Section III r.36

Cases cited (3)

  • Philipps v Philipps (5 Q.B.D. 60)
  • Wickham v Taylor (35 Ch.D. 272)
  • Abdi Nur v BEA Corporation (3 E.A.L.R. 15)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Oza v New India Assurance Co. Ltd (C.C. No. 115-1936) [1936] EACA 133 (1 January 1936)
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.