Wakilii

Ssebudde v Matsiko (Miscellaneous Application No. 15651 of 2014)

High Court · [2016] UGHCEBD 15 · 2016 Appeal Allowed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Appeal from taxation of court bailiff's bill of costs in execution proceedings
Decision
Award set aside and reduced from UGX 8,000,000 to UGX 260,000

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 held that the Taxing Master erred by applying the 3% fee scale for attachment of moveable property to immoveable property. The 3% rate under the Second Schedule applies only to moveable property when keeping possession for fifteen days. For immoveable property, the applicable fees are fixed amounts: UGX 30,000 for attachment where the decree exceeds UGX 120,000 and UGX 12,000 for postponement of sale. The award of UGX 8,000,000 was set aside and reduced to UGX 260,000.

Outcome

Award set aside and reduced from UGX 8,000,000 to UGX 260,000

Facts

The appellant was a judgment creditor in execution proceedings arising from Civil Suit No. 679 of 2006. The court bailiff (respondent) was issued a warrant to give vacant possession of immoveable property valued at UGX 270,000,000. The bailiff received an advance of UGX 500,000, cleared the warrant with police and the RDC, but before he could evict the occupants, execution was stayed by court. The bailiff filed a Bill of Costs for taxation, claiming 3% professional fees on instructions (UGX 8,100,000) based on the property value. The Taxing Master allowed UGX 8,000,000. The appellant appealed, contending the 3% rate applies only to moveable property, not immoveable property.

Issues

  1. Whether the Taxing Master erred in awarding instruction fees of UGX 8,000,000 to the court bailiff.
  2. Whether the application was properly before court given procedural objections raised.
  3. Whether the 3% fee scale for moveable property applies to execution against immoveable property.

Orders

  • Appeal allowed.
  • The award of UGX 8,000,000 granted as court bailiff's instruction fees is set aside.
  • The amount due to the respondent is reduced to UGX 260,000, considering the advance payment of UGX 500,000 already received.
  • Preliminary objections raised by the respondent are overruled.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Execution — Court Bailiffs' Fees — Distinction Between Moveable and Immoveable Property
The 3% fee scale prescribed in the Second Schedule of the Judicature Act (Court Bailiffs Rules) for attachment when the amount exceeds UGX 120,000 applies only to moveable property and includes keeping possession for fifteen days. It does not apply to execution against immoveable property.
Civil Procedure — Execution — Court Bailiffs' Fees — Immoveable Property
For attachment of immoveable property where the decree exceeds UGX 120,000, the bailiff is entitled to a fixed fee of UGX 30,000. Where there is postponement of sale or vacant possession and the amount exceeds UGX 120,000, the bailiff is entitled to an additional fixed fee of UGX 12,000.
Civil Procedure — Preliminary Objections — Substantive Justice Over Technicalities
Where a party responding to an application is given full opportunity to be heard and suffers no prejudice from a procedural irregularity, courts should exercise substantive justice without undue regard to technicalities. The failure to list all parties to the underlying suit in an appeal from taxation does not amount to an impermissible amendment of pleadings.

Legislation cited (5)

  • Civil Procedure Act s.98
  • Judicature Act (Court Bailiffs Rules) r.2(2)
  • Judicature Act (Court Bailiffs Rules) Second Schedule s.1(2)
  • Judicature Act (Court Bailiffs Rules) Second Schedule SI 13-16
  • Civil Procedure Rules O.6 r.19

Cases cited (1)

  • Adonia v Mutekanga [1970] EA 429

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Ssebudde v Matsiko (Miscellaneous Application No. 15651 of 2014) [2016] UGHCEBD 15 (24 May 2016)
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.