The Federal Supreme Court of Ethiopia introduced a significant measure in March 2017 to bring order to the often unpredictable world of legal expenses. The Federal Courts Costs and Damages Determination Directive No. 2-2017 was designed to move away from inconsistent judicial discretion and toward a transparent, equitable system.
This post explores the directive’s framework and what it means for anyone involved in a civil case in federal court.
The Purpose of the Directive
Before this directive, litigants often faced uncertainty regarding how much of their spending would be reimbursed if they won, or how much they might owe if they lost. By establishing clear guidelines, the Federal Supreme Court aimed to:
- Ensure fairness and predictability in cost allocation.
- Standardize how judges determine losses and expenses.
- Improve user satisfaction by making the financial side of justice more transparent.
Defining Costs and Damages
The directive defines “costs and damages” as the direct expenses incurred to obtain judicial service or financial burdens directly caused by the litigation. This spans the entire lifecycle of a case, from the initial preparation of a claim to the final execution of a judgment.
The recoverable expenses generally fall into these primary categories:
- Judicial service fees and stamp duties.
- Professional fees for attorneys and advocates.
- Payments for witness appearances.
- Logistics such as food, lodging, and transportation.
Recoverable Expenses in Detail
Section 9 of the directive provides an exhaustive list of what a party can claim. These include:
- Drafting fees: Costs for writing claims, defenses, appeals, or petitions.
- Travel and subsistence: Transportation (including air or train tickets where appropriate) and lodging based on prevailing market prices.
- Legal representation: Attorney fees as permitted by law.
- Expert and technical fees: Payments made to experts or bodies required to execute a court order.
- Administrative costs: Court fees, summons fees, and payments for translators, photocopying, or e-filing services.
- Execution expenses: Costs related to auctions and asset preservation orders.
Limitations and Fairness
It is important to note that costs must be directly related to the litigation. Judges are required to consider the reasonableness of the claims. Expenses that are deemed excessive, unrelated to the case, or made in bad faith—such as artificially inflated attorney fees—can be reduced or dismissed by the court.+1
Judges also look at the complexity of the case, the conduct of the parties during the trial, and the prevailing economic conditions when finalizing these amounts.
Final Thoughts
Directive No. 2-2017 is more than just a list of fees; it is a tool for accountability. By standardizing these costs, Ethiopia’s federal courts provide a clearer roadmap for litigants to plan their budgets and understand the financial stakes of their legal journeys. Whether you are a business owner or an individual, understanding these rules is the first step toward a more predictable experience in the federal judicial system.