[2010] UGHC 119

[2010] UGHC 119

The court found that the Taxing Master erred by awarding instruction fees of UGX 60,000,000, which was excessive in light of comparable awards in similar election petition cases. The court held that items 2-165 of the bill of costs, relating to perusal and preparation, should have been included within the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2010] UGHC 119
Parties
Applicant: The Electoral Commission; Applicant: Hon. Kirunda Kivejinja; Respondent: Hon. Abdu Katuntu
Court
High Court of Uganda
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Number
Misc. Appeals No. 1 of 2009&2 of 2010
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Appeal / Ruling on Consolidated References Against Taxation of Costs
Outcome
Reference allowed; taxation award set aside and substituted with a reduced sum.
Legal Topics
Taxation of Costs, Instruction Fees, Election Petition Costs, Reference Against Taxing Master
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Election Petitions Taxation of Costs Instruction Fees Election Petition Costs Reference Against Taxing Master

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Electoral Commission

Applicant

Hon. Kirunda Kivejinja

Applicant

Hon. Abdu Katuntu

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Appeal / Ruling on Consolidated References Against Taxation of Costs

  1. 1 Whether the Taxing Master erred in awarding UGX 60,000,000 as instruction fees in an election petition.
  2. 2 Whether items 2-165 of the bill of costs should have been included under instruction fees.
  3. 3 Whether the Taxing Master conducted the taxation in contravention of applicable law and principles.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the Taxing Master erred by awarding instruction fees of UGX 60,000,000, which was excessive in light of comparable awards in similar election petition cases. The court held that items 2-165 of the bill of costs, relating to perusal and preparation, should have been included within the instruction fees and not allowed as separate items. The court applied established principles that costs should not be so high as to restrict access to justice, and that instruction fees must be commensurate with the work done and the public importance of the matter. The court substituted the instruction fee with a more reasonable sum of UGX 25,000,000, allowed only substantiated...

Court Disposition

Reference allowed; taxation award set aside and substituted with a reduced sum.

Orders

  • Instruction fees awarded at UGX 25,000,000.
  • Disbursements for items 166-204 maintained at UGX 3,046,000.