Wakilii

Jjuuko & 2 Others v Kironde & 12 Others (Civil Application 1096 of 2023)

Court of Appeal · [2024] UGCA 335 · 2024 Application Dismissed ✦ AI-generated summary ↓ Download
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application before a single Justice of Appeal for an interim order of stay of execution pending determination of a substantive stay application
Decision
Application for an interim order of stay of execution dismissed as moot; each party to bear own costs

The full judgment

Read the complete, verbatim text of this judgment.

Sign in to read the full 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

On an application for an interim order of stay of execution pending the substantive stay application, the court reaffirmed that such an order requires a pending substantive application, a duly filed notice of appeal, and an imminent threat of execution. Although a notice of appeal and a pending substantive application (MA 295 of 2021) existed, the affidavit in reply showed that execution had already ensued and the suit property had been alienated. The court held it would be moot to issue an interim order to preserve a status quo that had already changed, as courts do not issue orders in vain. The application was dismissed, with each party bearing its own costs.

Facts

Judgment in Civil Suit No. 55 of 2018 was delivered on 15 December 2018 in favour of the respondents over land comprised in Kyadondo Block 85 Plot 1777. The applicants lodged Civil Appeal No. 100 of 2021 and sought a stay of execution before the trial court (MA 31 of 2021), which was dismissed. They then filed MA 295 of 2021 before the Court of Appeal seeking a stay of execution and preservation of the status quo pending the appeal. The decree was extracted in 2020 and a notice to show cause why execution should not issue (EMA 22 of 2021) was filed in May 2021 and allowed in May 2022 when the applicants failed to attend court. The applicants filed the present interim application in October 2023. The respondents' affidavit in reply stated that execution had since ensued and the suit property had been alienated, an averment the applicants did not rebut.

Issues

  1. Whether the applicants satisfied the conditions for the grant of an interim order of stay of execution pending the hearing of the substantive stay application.
  2. Whether an interim order could issue where execution had already occurred and the suit property had been alienated.

Orders

  • Application dismissed.
  • Each party shall bear its own costs.

Key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Stay of Execution — Conditions for an Interim Order
An interim order of stay of execution requires a pending substantive application for stay in respect of a pending appeal, a notice of appeal duly filed in accordance with the applicable rules, and an imminent threat of execution of the lower court's orders before the substantive application is determined.
Civil Procedure — Interim Orders — Mootness — Status Quo Already Altered
Where execution has already occurred and the suit property has been alienated, an interim order seeking to preserve the status quo cannot issue, as the status quo has already changed and courts do not issue orders in vain.

Legislation cited (6)

  • Judicature Act s.11
  • Judicature (Court of Appeal Rules) Directions r.6(2)(b)
  • Judicature (Court of Appeal Rules) Directions r.43
  • Judicature (Court of Appeal Rules) Directions r.2(2)
  • Constitution Article 126(2)(a)
  • Constitution Article 126(2)(b)

Cases cited (7)

  • Lawrence Musiitwa Kyazze v Eunice Busingye (Civil Application No. 18 of 1990)
  • Kyambogo University v Professor Isaiah Omolo Ndiege (Civil Application No. 34 of 2013)
  • National Forestry Authority v The Omukama of Bunyoro Kitara and 2 Others (Civil Application No. 255 of 2019)
  • Theodore Ssekikubo and 2 Others v Attorney General and 4 Others (Constitutional Application No. 4 of 2014)
  • Uganda Revenue Authority v Nsubuga Guster and Another (Miscellaneous Application No. 16 of 2018)
  • Patrick Kaumba Wiltshire v Ismail Dabule (Civil Application No. 3 of 2018)
  • Gladys Mukula v Rosemary Nabukenya (Miscellaneous Application No. 211 of 2020)
Source: this page presents Wakilii’s issue analysis and metadata for a publicly reported Ugandan judgment. Any AI-generated summary is marked as such. Judgment text is sourced from the Uganda Legal Information Institute (ulii.org). Wakilii is not affiliated with ULII.