[2009] UGHC 189

[2009] UGHC 189

The Court found that the payment voucher (MMM5) relied upon by the respondent did not relate to the Bill of Costs in contention, which was for legal services rendered in respect of a loan facility agreement and debenture deed, not the matter referenced in MMM5. The respondent, having raised the issue of forgery,...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2009] UGHC 189
Parties
Applicant: M/S Kibeedi & Co. Advocates; Respondent: Pan Afric Commodities Ltd
Court
High Court of Uganda
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Number
Misc. Cause No.188 of 2008
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Preliminary Objection
Outcome
preliminary objection overruled; matter to proceed to taxation
Legal Topics
Advocate Client Costs, Taxation of Costs, Jurisdiction of Court, Allegation of Forgery
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Advocate Client Costs Taxation of Costs Jurisdiction of Court Allegation of Forgery

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 5 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

M/S Kibeedi & Co. Advocates

Applicant

Pan Afric Commodities Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Preliminary Objection

  1. 1 Whether there is a Bill of Costs to tax.
  2. 2 Whether the Court has jurisdiction to conduct taxation in light of allegations of forgery.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found that the payment voucher (MMM5) relied upon by the respondent did not relate to the Bill of Costs in contention, which was for legal services rendered in respect of a loan facility agreement and debenture deed, not the matter referenced in MMM5. The respondent, having raised the issue of forgery, bore the burden of proving it but failed to do so. The Court held that mere allegations of fraud or forgery, without proof, do not oust its jurisdiction to tax a Bill of Costs. The statutory requirements for taxation under the Advocates Act do not require the institution of a suit unless the specific conditions set out in the Act are met. Therefore, the preliminary objections were...

Court Disposition

preliminary objection overruled; matter to proceed to taxation

Orders

  • Objections raised by the respondent are overruled.
  • Costs to abide the outcome of Misc. Application No. 188 of 2008.