Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Tanzania decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The taxing officer allowed part of the bill, taxing the plaintiff’s costs at Tshs 1,620,000/= and taxing off the balance after reducing several claimed items.
The High Court dismissed a reference against taxation of costs, holding that the applicant failed to prove entitlement to the amounts claimed or that an advocate had been engaged.
The High Court set aside a taxed award of Tshs 420,000, holding that costs could not be granted after more than one sixth of the bill of costs was taxed off.
The taxing officer did not violate any taxation principle in awarding costs, but the instruction fee awarded was excessive given the nature of the matter as an application. The court substituted the instruction fee from Tshs. 2,500,000/= to Tshs. 2,000,000/=, resulting in a total award of Tshs. 2,924,000/=. Attendance fees were properly awarded based on court records.
Source excerpt
The Taxing Officer was justified in departing from prescribed instruction fees due to complexity but the extent of departure was excessive; instruction fees reduced to TZS 10,000,000/=. Appearance costs must follow prescribed scale; reduced to TZS 200,000/= for four days. Costs for attending bill of costs were properly awarded at TZS 1,000,000/= in discretion. Disbursements and filing fees remain intact.
Source excerpt
The one-sixth rule under Order 48 GN No.263/2015 only denies the costs of taxation proceedings, not the total amount of the bill of costs. The Taxing Officer erred in awarding costs of taxation when more than one-sixth was disallowed. Additionally, the Taxing Officer failed to consider all relevant factors, including the stage and nature of the suit, in assessing the quantum of costs. The awarded costs are reduced by half and the costs of taxation are disallowed.
Source excerpt
The one-sixth rule under Order 48 of the Advocates Remuneration Order, GN No.263 of 2015, only operates to deny the costs of the taxation proceedings, not the total amount of the Bill of Costs. The Bill of Costs was filed within the permitted time after rectification of the drawn order. However, the Taxing Officer failed to consider all relevant factors, including the joint representation of defendants and the procedural stage of the underlying suit, and thus the costs awarded should be halved and the costs of taxation proceedings disallowed.
Source excerpt
The High Court dismissed a taxation reference and upheld an award of TZS 10 million in instruction fees, finding the taxing officer properly exercised discretion.
The High Court reduced an instruction fee from TZS 3,000,000 to TZS 1,000,000, holding the taxing officer had exceeded the prescribed scale without justification.
The applicant failed to specify the nature of the taxed costs and did not demonstrate that the taxing master acted ultra vires or awarded excessive costs; the Advocate Remuneration Order does not prohibit the taxing officer from ordering payment within a specified time without execution application; the application lacks merit and is dismissed.
Source excerpt
Explore more
