Geoffery Nangumya v Gulf Stream Investments (U) Ltd and Others (Civil Reference No. 22 of 2023)

Court of Appeal · [2026] UGCA 172 · 2026 Reference Dismissed ✦ AI-generated summary ↓ Download

Jurisdiction

Uganda

Case Type

Reference to the full Court of Appeal from a single justice's refusal of a temporary injunction pending appeal

Decision

Reference dismissed; the single justice's refusal of the temporary injunction upheld

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

On a reference from a single justice's refusal of a temporary injunction pending appeal, the Court of Appeal held that the applicant failed to satisfy the conditions for an injunction. He neither pleaded nor proved a prima facie appeal with a likelihood of success; filing a notice of appeal alone does not establish such likelihood. Reporting the eviction to police and cancellation of the bailiff's licence did not prove possession, while the bailiff's return of execution and transfer of the property to the first respondent showed he was no longer in possession. He also failed to prove the alleged demolition. Finding no error in the single justice's exercise of discretion, the Court dismissed the reference with costs.

Facts

The applicant, a mortgagor and judgment debtor, entered into a consent judgment with the second respondent, a bank, but failed to meet the settlement terms. The second respondent obtained an eviction order over land comprised in LRV 3323 Folio 47, Martin Road, Old Kampala. The applicant's application to review and set aside the eviction order was dismissed as overtaken by events. He filed a notice of appeal and an application for a temporary injunction pending appeal, which a single justice dismissed for lack of merit, prompting this reference. By that time the bailiff had made a return of execution and the suit property had been transferred to the first respondent. The applicant alleged the property, where his offices were located, would be demolished, that Uganda Police were investigating the eviction, and that the bailiff's licence had been suspended.

Issues

Whether Civil Application No. 841 of 2022 fulfilled the conditions for the grant of a temporary injunction.
Whether the single justice erred in the exercise of her discretion in declining to grant the temporary injunction.

Orders

The reference is dismissed.
Costs awarded to the respondents.

Key headnotes

Civil Procedure — References — Nature of a reference to the full court

A reference to the full court from a decision of a single justice is in the nature of an appeal.

Civil Procedure — Appellate Interference with Discretion

An appellate court will not interfere with a judge's exercise of discretion unless the judge misdirected himself or herself on some matter and as a result reached a wrong decision, or it is manifest that the judge was clearly wrong and an injustice resulted.

Civil Procedure — Temporary Injunction — Conditions for Grant

An applicant for a temporary injunction must show a prima facie case with a probability of success and that he would otherwise suffer irreparable damage not adequately compensable in damages; where the court is in doubt on those two points, it decides the application on the balance of convenience.

Civil Procedure — Injunction Pending Appeal — Proof of Likelihood of Success

Filing a notice of appeal shows only an intention to appeal and does not by itself prove that the intended appeal has a likelihood of success; the applicant must place material before the court to establish that likelihood.

Land & Property — Possession — Proof on Application for Injunction

Reporting an eviction to police and the cancellation of a bailiff's licence do not prove possession of property; a return of execution by the bailiff coupled with transfer of the property to a third party is proof that the applicant is no longer in possession.

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.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.76
Civil Procedure Rules O.22 r.22
Building Control Act Cap. 135
Building Control Regulations 2020 reg.28

Cases cited (7)

Robert Kavuma v Hotel International Ltd (Civil Appeal No. 8 of 1990)
[2014] UGCA 44
Grace Bamurangye Bororoza & 53 Others v Dr. Kasirivu Atwoki & 5 Others (Supra)
[2020] UGSC 35
[2012] UGCA 24
[1999] UGSC 1
[2015] UGSC 21

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.