Wakilii

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

High Court · [1996] UGHC 183 Appeal Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Appeal from taxation of costs arising from dismissal of application for certiorari and prohibition
Decision
Appeal dismissed; taxation by the taxing officer 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

The High Court dismissed an appeal from taxation of costs. The court held that where the Advocates (Remuneration and Taxation of Costs) Rules 1982 have been amended by the 1996 Amendment Rules, which came into force on 2 February 1996 and replaced the schedules to the 1982 Rules, the taxing officer must apply the amended Rules to taxation conducted after that date, notwithstanding that the bill of costs was filed before the amendment. The court further held that it will not interfere with a taxing officer's assessment of quantum unless the award is so high or low as to amount to an injustice.

Outcome

Appeal dismissed; taxation by the taxing officer upheld

Facts

The respondent union had applied for orders of certiorari and prohibition to quash an Industrial Court award. The High Court dismissed the application on preliminary grounds, holding that the Trade Disputes (Arbitration and Settlement) Act does not apply to Industrial Court awards. The appellant employers' association appealed the subsequent taxation of costs, contending the taxing officer erred in applying the Advocates (Remuneration and Taxation of Costs) (Amendment) Rules 1996 rather than the 1982 Rules to a bill filed in December 1995, and that the instruction fee of shs. 40,000,000 was excessive. The appellant argued that the bill should be taxed under the 1982 Rules because it was filed before the 1996 amendment took effect.

Issues

  1. Whether the taxing officer applied wrong principles in taxation.
  2. Whether the taxing officer erred in applying the Advocates (Remuneration and Taxation of Costs) (Amendment) Rules 1996 rather than the 1982 Rules.
  3. Whether the taxing officer erred 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 when he awarded excessive costs.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed.
  • Costs awarded to the respondent.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Taxation of Costs — Application of Amendment Rules to Pending Bills
Where statutory rules are amended and the amendment expressly replaces schedules to the original rules with new schedules, the amended rules apply to all taxation conducted after the amendment comes into force, notwithstanding that the bill of costs was filed before the amendment.
Statutory Interpretation — Commencement and Application of Amendment Rules
Under section 17(1) of the Interpretation Decree, a statutory instrument comes into force on the date provided in the instrument or, where no date is provided, on the date of publication in the Gazette. An amendment rule that provides that it shall be read as one with the principal rules creates a unified body of law from the date the amendment takes effect.
Civil Procedure — Taxation of Costs — Appellate Interference with Taxing Officer's Quantum Assessment
On questions of quantum, the decision of the taxing officer is generally final. The court will only interfere when the award is so high or so low as to amount to an injustice to one party. It is a very exceptional case in which the court will even listen to an application to review the taxing officer's decision on quantum.
Civil Procedure — Taxation of Costs — Assessment of Instruction Fees
Instruction fees are assessed on the basis of the amount of work involved in preparation for hearing, the complication and importance of the case, and to some degree the amount involved. The fact that an application is dismissed does not affect the amount of work counsel must put into preparation for the hearing.

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. Muwanqa
  • Re Estate of Orgilvie, Orgilvie 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)
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.