Wakilii

Uganda Bankers' (Employers) Association v National Union Of Clerical Commercial Professional and Technical Employees (Miscellaneous Cause 183 of 1996)

High Court · [1996] UGHC 67 · 1996 Appeal Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Appeal by way of Chamber Summons from taxation of costs under section 61(1) of the Advocates Act
Decision
Appeal dismissed with costs to the respondent; taxation ruling upheld

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

An appeal from taxation of costs challenging the application of the 1996 Amendment Rules was dismissed. The court held that where the Advocates (Remuneration and Taxation of Costs) Rules 1982 were amended by the 1996 Amendment Rules effective 2 February 1996, the taxing officer was bound to apply the amended rules even if the bill of costs was filed before the amendment came into force. The taxing officer properly exercised his discretion in awarding instruction fees of shs. 40,000,000 for a substantive application of public importance involving industrial relations.

Outcome

Appeal dismissed with costs to the respondent; taxation ruling upheld

Facts

The appellant, Uganda Bankers' Association, filed Miscellaneous Cause No. 171 of 1995 seeking orders of certiorari and prohibition to quash an Industrial Court award dated 18 April 1995. The High Court dismissed the application on a preliminary point without going into the merits. The respondent union filed a bill of costs which was taxed by a taxing officer on 21 March 1996. The taxing officer applied the Advocates (Remuneration and Taxation of Costs) (Amendment) Rules 1996, which had come into force on 2 February 1996, and awarded shs. 40,052,500 in costs. On item 1 (instruction fees), the taxing officer taxed off shs. 200,000,000 and allowed shs. 40,000,000. The appellant challenged the taxation on four grounds, arguing that the 1982 Rules should have applied because the bill of costs was filed on 5 December 1995 before the amendment, and that the costs awarded were excessive.

Issues

  1. Whether the taxing officer applied wrong principles in taxation of costs.
  2. Whether the taxing officer erred in law by relying on and applying the Advocates (Remuneration and Taxation of Costs) (Amendment) Rules 1996.
  3. Whether the taxing officer erred in law in not applying the sixth schedule to the Advocates (Remuneration and Taxation of Costs) Rules 1982.
  4. Whether the taxing officer failed to exercise his discretion judicially by awarding excessive costs.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed.
  • Costs of the appeal awarded to the respondent.
  • Cross-appeal dismissed.

Rules and key headnotes

Taxation of Costs — Application of Amended Rules — Commencement and Effect
Where statutory rules amending taxation scales come into force after a bill of costs is filed but before taxation is conducted, the taxing officer must apply the amended rules in force at the date of taxation, not the rules in force when the bill was filed.
Taxation of Costs — Reading Amended and Principal Rules Together
By virtue of the Advocates (Remuneration and Taxation of Costs) (Amendment) Rules 1996 rule 1, the 1982 Rules as amended and the 1996 Rules are read as one with effect from the date the 1996 Rules came into force, and it is not legally attainable to separate the two sets of rules or apply only the earlier unamended rules.
Taxation of Costs — Quantum and Judicial Discretion
On questions of quantum the decision of the taxing officer is generally final, and a court will only interfere when the award is so high or so low as to amount to an injustice to one party; it must be a very exceptional case in which the court would review the taxing officer's decision on quantum.
Taxation of Costs — Assessment of Instruction Fees — Factors
In assessing instruction fees, relevant considerations include the amount of work involved in preparation, the complexity and importance of the case, any peculiar complication in its presentation, and to a variable extent the amount of the subject matter, though dismissal on a preliminary point does not reduce the preparation work counsel must undertake.
Taxation of Costs — Public Importance of Matter
Where an application concerns industrial relations between leading employers and unionised employees and has the possibility of causing industrial strikes in sympathy or solidarity, the public importance of the matter is a relevant factor in assessing whether instruction fees were properly awarded.

Legislation cited (10)

  • Advocates Act s.61(1)
  • Taxation of Costs (Appeals and References) Rules r.3
  • Advocates (Remuneration and Taxation of Costs) Rules 1982
  • Advocates (Remuneration and Taxation of Costs) (Amendment) Rules 1996 r.1
  • Advocates (Remuneration and Taxation of Costs) (Amendment) Rules 1996 r.3
  • Advocates (Remuneration and Taxation of Costs) Rules 1982 r.34
  • Advocates (Remuneration and Taxation of Costs) Rules 1982 r.35
  • Interpretation Decree s.17(1)
  • Judicature Act s.34
  • Trade Disputes (Arbitration and Settlement) Act

Cases cited (7)

  • Makula International Ltd v Cardinal Nsubuga and Another [1982] HCB 11
  • Premchand Raichand Ltd and Another v Quarry Services of East Africa Ltd and Others (No. 3) [1973] EA 162
  • Amalgamated Transport and General Workers Union v Uganda Transport Company Limited [1972] 2 ULR 171
  • Miscellaneous Cause No. 99 of 1972
  • Kabaka Vs. Muwanga
  • In the Estate of Ogilvie, Ogilvie v Massey [1910] 103 LT 154
  • Pardhan v Osman [1969] EA 528

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Uganda Bankers' (Employers) Association v National Union Of Clerical Commercial Professional and Technical Employees (Miscellaneous Cause 183 of 1996) [1996] UGHC 67 (22 August 1996)
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.