Dingiriha II vs Kalu Menika – clr volume 2 page 154

In Dingirinha II v. Kalu Menika, the court addressed the issue of whether the costs of appeal should encompass expenses incurred in the lower court for the purpose of forwarding the appeal to the Supreme Court, and by whom such costs ought to be taxed. It was determined that “costs of this appeal” includes incidental expenses incurred in the lower court, such as filing petitions and finding security, which are properly within the Secretary’s jurisdiction for taxation. The decision reaffirmed the principle that appeal costs extend to all necessary steps taken in the lower court related to the appeal, not solely those incurred at the appellate level. Reliance was placed on established judicial procedure distinguishing the taxing authority for various stages of litigation, clarifying the scop