Wakilii

Rugumba v Attorney General of Republic of Rwanda (Taxation Cause No.2 of 2012)

East African Court of Justice · [2013] EACJ 152 · 2013 Application Partly Allowed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Taxation of costs following judgment in Reference No. 8 of 2010
Decision
Bill of costs substantially reduced from USD 5,231,956.76 to USD 24,801.59

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 Taxing Officer reduced the applicant's claim for instruction fees from USD 2,000,000 to USD 15,000, finding the underlying reference not complex. Disbursements without original receipts were taxed off pursuant to Rule 4(2) requiring production of receipts. Perusal of documents drawn by the applicant himself was disallowed. Getting up fees of one-quarter of instruction fees were awarded. Total bill taxed at USD 24,801.59.

Outcome

Bill of costs substantially reduced from USD 5,231,956.76 to USD 24,801.59

Facts

The applicant filed a bill of costs claiming USD 5,231,956.76 following a successful reference (Reference No. 8 of 2010) in which the court awarded costs to the applicant. The bill included instruction fees of USD 2,000,000, getting up fees, and various disbursements for travel, accommodation, and filing expenses. Items 3 to 5, 8 to 33, 39, 50, 62, 68, 74, and 76 were undisputed. The respondent challenged the quantum of instruction fees and disputed numerous disbursement items on grounds that original receipts were not produced. The applicant's counsel produced only photocopies of receipts, stating he had misplaced the originals after scanning. Counsel for the applicant initially proposed settling instruction fees at USD 100,000 but the respondent offered only USD 5,000.

Issues

  1. What amount should be awarded as instruction fees for the underlying reference?
  2. Whether disbursements claimed without original receipts should be allowed.
  3. Whether perusal of documents drawn by the applicant himself can be taxed separately from instruction fees.
  4. Whether getting up fees should be awarded in addition to instruction fees.

Orders

  • Instruction fees taxed at USD 15,000.
  • VAT at 18% on instruction fees awarded: USD 2,700.
  • Getting up fees awarded at one-quarter of instruction fees: USD 3,750.
  • Undisputed items totalling USD 3,351.59 allowed.
  • Item No. 2 taxed at USD 5.
  • Items No. 6, 7, 35, 34 to 40 (except 76), 41, 39, 43, 45 to 49, 51 to 55, 56, 57 to 67, 69 to 73, and 75 taxed off.
  • Grand total bill taxed at USD 24,801.59 payable to the applicant.

Rules and key headnotes

Taxation of Costs — Instruction Fees — Discretion of Taxing Officer
In taxing instruction fees, the Taxing Officer has discretion to determine a reasonable amount considering the complexity of the case, the number of parties, and the principle that costs should be kept at a level that is reasonable, affordable, and proportionate to remunerate the advocate without deterring citizens from seeking justice.
Taxation of Costs — Disbursements — Proof by Original Receipts
Rule 4(2) of the Second Schedule to the Rules of Procedure requires that receipts for disbursements be produced to the taxing officer at the time of taxation. Where only photocopies are produced without certification as true copies or supporting affidavit, the disbursements must be taxed off.
Taxation of Costs — Perusal of Documents — Documents Drawn by Applicant
Perusal of documents can only be claimed in respect of documents drawn by the opposite party and not documents drawn by the applicant himself.
Taxation of Costs — Getting Up Fees
Where issues for trial are joined by the pleadings, getting up fees shall be allowed in addition to instruction fees at not less than one-quarter of the instruction fee allowed on taxation, in accordance with Rule 1 of the Second Schedule to the Rules of Procedure.

Cases cited (2)

  • Katabazi case
  • Kenya Port Authority v Modern Holdings Ltd

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Rugumba v Attorney General of Republic of Rwanda (Taxation Cause No.2 of 2012) [2013] EACJ 152 (3 May 2013)
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.