Mayambala and 4 Others v Nantaba and 5 Others (Civil Application No. 644 of 2022)

The full judgment

Read the complete, verbatim text of this judgment.

Holding

The single Justice declined to grant an interim stay of execution of the decree revoking the applicants' letters of administration. While a substantive application existed, the High Court orders had already been implemented: the applicants' letters were revoked for non-filing of an inventory and mismanagement, and the respondents had obtained a Certificate of No Objection from the Administrator General. Because the status quo had already changed and the orders had been enforced, the matter was overtaken by events and there was nothing left to stay. The application was dismissed, with costs to abide the outcome of the main application.

Facts

The applicants were administrators of the estate of the late Ssalongo Kisitu Ephraim, having obtained letters of administration from the High Court (Family Division). On 4 January 2022, in Civil Suit No. 149 of 2019, the High Court revoked their letters of administration for non-filing of an inventory and mismanagement of the estate, in favour of the respondents. The respondents extracted a decree and the applicants sought a stay of execution in the High Court (Miscellaneous Application No. 84 of 2022), which was dismissed for lack of merit on the basis that execution had already taken place. The applicants then filed a substantive application and this interim application in the Court of Appeal. The respondents had moved the Administrator General to appoint new administrators and had obtained a Certificate of No Objection. The applicants argued there was a serious threat of execution; the respondents contended the matter was overtaken by events as the orders had already been enforced.

Issues

1. Whether the applicants satisfied the conditions for the grant of an interim order of stay of execution.
2. Whether there was a serious threat of execution before the hearing of the substantive application.
3. Whether the application was overtaken by events given that the High Court orders had already been implemented.

Orders

• Application for interim stay of execution declined.
• The application is dismissed.
• Costs shall abide the cause of the main application for stay of execution.

Key headnotes

Legislation cited (5)

• Judicature (Court of Appeal) Rules r.2(2)
• Judicature (Court of Appeal) Rules r.6(2)
• Judicature (Court of Appeal) Rules r.42
• Judicature (Court of Appeal) Rules r.43(1)
• Civil Procedure Act s.98

Cases cited (3)

• Huang Sung Industries Ltd v Tajdin Hussein and 2 Others (Supreme Court Civil Application No. 19 of 2008)
• Mugume V Akankwasa (2008) HCB 760
• Zubeda Mohamed and Sadru Mohamed v Latifa Kaka Walita and Another (Supreme Court Civil Reference No. 07 of 2016)