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 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 Taxing Officer erred in awarding transport costs without proof, but acted within discretion in awarding instruction fees without requiring receipts, as per the Advocates Remuneration Order, 2015 and relevant case law.
Source excerpt
The High Court dismissed a reference challenging taxation of costs, holding that assessors were not required in the bill of costs proceedings and receipts were not mandatory proof of instruction fees.
The taxing master erred in principle by failing to consider the applicant's age and health in assessing transport costs, by requiring receipts for private transport, by taxing off instruction fees despite evidence of advocate engagement, and by failing to exercise discretion in awarding costs for prosecuting the Bill of Costs. The court varied the awards to reflect reasonable costs based on the evidence and legal principles.
Source excerpt
The Taxing Officer erred in awarding Tsh. 3,618,000 as costs without sufficient proof and in excess of the statutory minimum instruction fee; the correct amount, as per the Advocates Remuneration Order, is Tsh. 1,618,000, which is hereby taxed as the total amount.
Source excerpt
The Taxing Officer exercised her discretion judiciously in awarding TZS 23,569,415 as instruction fees, and there was no manifest error or misapplication of principle; however, the award of TZS 1,000,000 for prosecuting the bill of costs was contrary to Order 55(3) of the Advocates Remuneration Order and is set aside.
Source excerpt
The respondent failed to provide evidence or receipts for the claimed professional costs; only costs directly paid to the court and substantiated in the bill of costs should be awarded.
Source excerpt
The High Court dismissed a reference challenging taxation of costs, holding that receipts were not required and the taxing master had properly exercised discretion.
Taxed costs must be supported by sufficient evidence or reasonable explanation; mere reliance on the remuneration scale or legal entitlement without factual proof is insufficient. The court reduced the awarded costs to amounts it found reasonable and supported by evidence or concession.
Source excerpt
The Taxing Officer erred by failing to consider all relevant factors in assessing instruction fees and by requiring EFD receipts for instruction fees and court attendance, contrary to current legal principles. The applicable scale for instruction fees was misapplied for item 1, which should have been under Schedule 11(k), and for item 2, which should have been under the 9th Schedule at 3%. Items for court attendance were wrongly taxed off for lack of receipts, contrary to established authority.
Source excerpt
Explore more
