Kisekka v Rwabunyoro (Civil Application 1131 of 2023)
The full judgment
Read the complete, verbatim text of this judgment.
AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions — always read the source judgment before relying on it.
Holding
The single Justice of Appeal held that an interim order of stay of execution requires a competent notice of appeal, a pending substantive application for stay, and a serious threat of execution, the existence of a competent notice of appeal being a sine qua non. Because the underlying suit was dismissed in a matter not carrying an automatic right of appeal, and the applicant's application for leave to appeal had been dismissed for want of prosecution, the notice of appeal was incompetent and there was no pending appeal. On that ground alone the application failed and was dismissed.
Facts
The applicant filed a civil suit in the Land Division of the High Court concerning suit land, later transferred to the High Court at Mubende. The High Court ruled that the plaint disclosed no cause of action and dismissed the suit. The applicant filed a notice of appeal and an application in the High Court for leave to appeal and stay of execution, but that application was dismissed for want of prosecution. The applicant then filed a substantive application for stay of execution in the Court of Appeal and the present application for an interim order, asserting threats of eviction and alienation of the land to third parties pending the intended appeal. The respondent opposed the application, noting that the costs had been taxed at UShs 123,109,400, that no execution application had been filed, and that leave to appeal had never been obtained.
Issues
- Whether the applicant satisfied the conditions for the grant of an interim order of stay of execution pending appeal.
- Whether a notice of appeal filed in a matter requiring leave to appeal, where leave was not obtained, can found an application for stay of execution.
Orders
- Application dismissed with no order as to costs.
Key headnotes
Legislation cited (4)
- Judicature (Court of Appeal Rules) Directions S.I 13-10 r.2(2)
- Judicature (Court of Appeal Rules) Directions S.I 13-10 r.6(2)(b)
- Judicature (Court of Appeal Rules) Directions S.I 13-10 r.43(1)
- Civil Procedure Rules Order 39
Cases cited (8)
- Theodore Ssekikubo and 3 Others v Attorney General (Constitutional Application No. 6 of 2013)
- Hwan Sung Industries Ltd v Taidin Hussein and 2 Others (Civil Application No. 19 of 2008)
- Lawrence Musiitwa Kyazze v Eunice Businge (Civil Application No. 18 of 1990)
- Zubeda Mohammed and Another v Laila Kaka and Another (Civil Reference No. 7 of 2016)
- Theodore Ssekikubo and 2 Others v Attorney General and 4 Others (Constitutional Application No. 4 of 2014)
- Uganda Revenue Authority v Nsubuga Guster & Another, Miscellaneous Application No. 1t o'[-20'1E
- Patrick Kaumba Wiltshire v Ismail Dabule (Civil Application No. 3 of 2018)
- Lukwago Erias and Another v Attorney General and Another (Civil Application No. 6 of 2014)