Wakilii

Sebalu v Secretary General of East African Community and Another (Taxation Cause No.1 of 2011)

East African Court of Justice · [2012] EACJ 24 · 2012 Application Partly Allowed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Taxation of costs following Reference No. 1 of 2010
Decision
Bill of costs reduced from USD 14,357,669.10 to USD 105,068.20 and taxed accordingly

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 assessed the bill of costs at USD 105,068.20, comprising instruction fees of USD 65,000, getting up fees of USD 16,250, VAT of USD 14,625, and reimbursable disbursements of USD 9,193.20. The original claim of USD 10 million for instruction fees was found excessive and unreasonable. The Taxing Officer applied Rule 4 of the Second Schedule requiring receipts for disbursements and disallowed numerous items lacking proper documentation. Getting up fees were awarded at one quarter of instruction fees per Rule 2(1) of the Second Schedule.

Outcome

Bill of costs reduced from USD 14,357,669.10 to USD 105,068.20 and taxed accordingly

Facts

Hon. Sitenda Sebalu filed a bill of costs totalling USD 14,357,669.10 following his success in Reference No. 1 of 2010 before the East African Court of Justice. The bill claimed instruction fees of USD 10 million plus numerous disbursements for travel, accommodation, photocopying, and court fees incurred in conducting the reference between Kampala and Arusha. The applicant was represented by two law firms. The respondents contested the quantum of instruction fees as excessive and challenged numerous disbursement items for lack of supporting receipts. The matter came before the Taxing Officer for assessment of the appropriate costs to be awarded.

Issues

  1. What is the appropriate amount to be awarded as instruction fees for Reference No. 1 of 2010?
  2. Whether the applicant is entitled to a getting up fee in a matter determined on affidavit evidence?
  3. Which items in the bill of costs are properly supported by receipts and should be allowed?

Orders

  • Bill of costs taxed at USD 105,068.20.
  • Instruction fees awarded at USD 65,000.00.
  • Getting up fees awarded at USD 16,250.00.
  • VAT of 18% awarded at USD 14,625.00.
  • Reimbursable disbursements awarded at USD 9,193.20.
  • Total sum to be shared equally between the 1st Respondent and 2nd Respondent.

Rules and key headnotes

Taxation of Costs — Instruction Fees — Factors for Assessment
In assessing instruction fees, the taxing officer is entitled to exercise discretion to award such fee as is just, taking into account the nature and importance of the matter, the interest of the parties, the general conduct of proceedings, and any other relevant circumstances.
Taxation of Costs — Disbursements — Requirement for Receipts
Rule 4 of the Second Schedule of the East African Court of Justice Rules requires that receipts for disbursements shall be produced to the taxing officer at the time of taxation. This is a mandatory requirement and boarding passes or invoices without proof of payment are insufficient.
Taxation of Costs — Perusal Fees — Own Documents
Perusal fees can only be charged on documents received from other parties and not on documents drawn by counsel themselves, as such work is covered under instruction fees pursuant to Rule 9(3) of the Second Schedule.
Taxation of Costs — Getting Up Fees — Affidavit Evidence
A party is entitled to getting up fees at one quarter of the instruction fee under Rule 2(1) of the Second Schedule when the advocate prepares a case for trial, even where the matter proceeds on affidavit evidence.

Cases cited (5)

  • Prof Anyang' Nyong'o and Others Vs Attorney General of the Republic of Kenya and Others
  • Calist Mwatela and 2 Others Vs East African Community
  • Modern Holdings (EA) Limited Vs the Kenya Ports Authority
  • James Katabazi's case
  • Premchand Limited and Another, 1972 East Africa page 162

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Sebalu v Secretary General of East African Community and Another (Taxation Cause No.1 of 2011) [2012] EACJ 24 (20 January 2012)
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.