kalunga company advocates vs national bank of commerce ltd 2002 tzhc 14 11 october 2002
As the respondent does not oppose the applications in principle and liability is admitted, the court grants the orders as prayed for taxation of the Bill of Costs and related reliefs.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- kalunga company advocates vs national bank of commerce ltd 2002 tzhc 14 11 october 2002
- Parties
- Applicant: Kalunga and Company Advocates; Respondent: National Bank of Commerce
- Court
- TZHC
- Jurisdiction
- Tanzania
- Judgment Date
- 11 October 2002
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Civil Application / Ruling on Interlocutory Applications
- Outcome
- Applications allowed
- Legal Topics
- Taxation of Costs, Advocates' Fees, Interest on Costs
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Kalunga and Company Advocates
Applicant
National Bank of Commerce
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Civil Application / Ruling on Interlocutory Applications
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to have its Bill of Costs taxed according to law
- 2 Whether the applicant is entitled to interest on the Bill of Costs
- 3 Whether the respondent is liable to pay the applicant's legal fees in the absence of an agreement on remuneration
Ratio Decidendi
As the respondent does not oppose the applications in principle and liability is admitted, the court grants the orders as prayed for taxation of the Bill of Costs and related reliefs.
Court Disposition
Applications allowed
Orders
- Bill of Costs to be taxed by the Taxing Officer according to law
- Taxing Officer to tax both the Bill and costs of taxation and certify amounts due
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
In these consolic1nted miscell!)naous Civil i\pplic?tiotPNos 114 ond 117 of 2002 Kolungn end CompDny Advocotes herein-after referred to as , the applicant is seeking for the following ordars, namely:- (i) that tho Bill of Costs annexed here~to be t~ed by the TDXing Officer ,,-ccordingto law; (if) that the Taxing Officer t~xes not only the Bill but nlso costa o.:f' the taxation ::1nd certifies what i8 due to the applicant in ~pect of the Bill and in respect of the costs of tbXation; (ii1) that until the t~tion is completed, no ~ction should be commenced on the liill and any oction ~lret:ldy commenced F.~st"ayr,,:; (iv) that interest be paid on the Bill ot the rote of 7% per annuo from the date of delivery to the respondent of the said Bill to the d~te of satisfaction by the respondent. In support of these oVpliections filed under Sections 61, 62, and 6~ of the Advocates' Ordinance Cap 341 the affidavit deponed by Leopeld Thom~s Knlunga Feq The Principal Pttrtnal' of Kalungo ond COr.1ponyAdvocates ip ottached. It is argued for the opplicant th~t upon instructions to conduct the Nation~l Bonk of Commeree's, the respondent, defence no p~ym€nts were mnde by the respondent to the applic~nt of its legnl fees. It is further contended for the applicant;~tse npplications are being mode because no agreoment was m~de between the applicant ~nd the respond~nt stating the quantum of th~ remuner~tion of the applicant nor how such remunerotion was to be calculated. In reply Mr. Mbeper~ the Acting Company Secretary of the r~Bpondent ndn1its the linbility to pay s~ve for tho failure of the ~prlicant to avcil to it the relevant ease files i~ order to verify the bills as submitted~ As the resr::ondent doos n"t in principle oppose th~ npplic"ltions herein filed I will allow th~ ~nd grant the orders Os prDyed in the chomber summonses. Costs to !.J. '(J'Ie in the couse. RUling delivered before Mr. Mhnngo nnd Mng~i leorned 1",dvocctes fOr the porties today 11/10/2002. - J1JIX1E 11/10/2002