John Ddamulira v Rogers Serunjogi and Fausta Serunjogi (Civil Application No. 1200 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 held that an interim order of stay of execution may issue where there is a pending substantive application for the same relief, a competent notice of appeal, and a serious and imminent threat of execution. A notice of appeal lodged on 11 April 2022 and the pending Civil Application No. 1199 of 2023 satisfied the first requirements, and the respondents' extracted decree, taxed costs, execution application, notice to show cause, and commenced construction on the suit property evidenced an imminent threat of execution and alienation. Preserving the status quo served the ends of justice, so the interim order restraining execution was granted pending determination of the substantive application.
Facts
Judgment was entered against the applicant in Civil Appeal No. 12 of 2019. On 22 April 2022 (and per the rejoinder, 11 April 2022) he filed a notice of appeal to the Supreme Court. The respondents extracted the decree, filed a bill of costs taxed at Ushs. 32,069,100, applied for execution, and obtained a notice to show cause why a warrant of arrest should not issue. They also sought to execute the High Court decree for taxed costs, special damages of Ushs. 50 million, general damages and interest, and had commenced construction on the suit property, described as approximately one acre of Kabaka's land at Badongo Zone LC1, Salaama parish, Makindye division, Kampala. The applicant filed a substantive stay application (Civil Application No. 1199 of 2023) and sought the present interim order to preserve the status quo. The respondents contended the substantive application and notice of appeal were incompetent and that the property was no longer in contention.
Issues
- Whether the application for an interim order of stay of execution was properly before the Court given the respondents' objection that no competent substantive application or notice of appeal existed.
- Whether there was a serious and imminent threat of execution of the decree in Civil Appeal No. 12 of 2019 sufficient to warrant an interim order pending the substantive stay application.
Orders
- An interim order is issued restraining the Respondents, their agents, employees, assignees or any persons claiming or deriving authority therefrom from taking any steps or actions in execution of the judgment decree arising from Civil Appeal No. 12 of 2019 pending the determination of Civil Application No. 1199 of 2023.
Key headnotes
Legislation cited (8)
- 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.42(2)
- Judicature (Court of Appeal Rules) Directions S.I 13-10 r.43(1)
- Judicature (Court of Appeal Rules) Directions S.I 13-10 r.43(2)
- Judicature (Court of Appeal Rules) Directions S.I 13-10 r.44(1)
- Judicature (Supreme Court Rules) Directions S.I 13-11 r.41
- Judicature (Supreme Court Rules) Directions S.I 13-11 r.41(2)
Cases cited (8)
- Zubeda Mohammed and Another v Laila Kaka Waiia and Another (Civil Reference No. 7 of 2016)
- Faustino Ntambara v Jack Kityo Segawole (Civil Application No. 150 of 2021)
- Matthew Rukikaire v Incafex Ltd (Civil Appeal No. 11 of 2015)
- Manuraguha Gashumba v Sam Nkundiye (Civil Application No. 24 of 2015)
- 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)
- Hwan Sung Industries Ltd v Tofin Hussein and 2 Others (Civil Application No. 19 of 2008)