Wakilii

Adrian Mubiru v Golden Eagle Complex (Miscellaneous Application 3053 of 2024)

High Court · [2025] UGHCLD 350 · 2025 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for stay of execution of decree pending determination of Court of Appeal civil appeal
Decision
Application for stay of execution granted conditionally upon deposit of security

Observed later treatment

No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.

Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains good law.

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 High Court held that an applicant seeking stay of execution need not file a notice of appeal against the final decree itself where a valid appeal against an interlocutory order excluding him from proceedings is pending before the Court of Appeal. The Court found that the appeal against the order allowing the suit to proceed ex parte was not overtaken by events and that the applicant satisfied the conditions for stay of execution, including demonstrating substantial loss and acting without unreasonable delay. The stay was granted conditionally upon the applicant depositing 25% of the decretal sum as security within 60 days.

Outcome

Application for stay of execution granted conditionally upon deposit of security

Facts

In April 2013, the applicant sold property comprised in Kyadondo Block 250 Plot 1016 to the respondent, who paid UGX 465,000,000 but the applicant failed to deliver title. The applicant obtained a further loan from Standard Chartered Bank on the same title and defaulted, forcing the respondent to purchase the property from the bank for UGX 500,000,000 in December 2018. The respondent sued for recovery of the initial payment in HCCS No. 0930 of 2017. On 17 April 2021, neither the applicant nor his lawyer appeared for hearing despite service, and the court allowed the respondent to proceed ex parte. The applicant filed HCMA No. 0701 of 2021 to set aside the ex parte order, which was dismissed on 9 November 2021. The applicant appealed this dismissal via Civil Appeal No. 0095 of 2022. While the appeal was pending, the High Court delivered judgment in favour of the respondent on 13 September 2022, awarding UGX 465,000,000 plus damages of UGX 132,000,000. The respondent filed for execution in October 2024, prompting the applicant to seek a stay of execution.

Issues

  1. Whether there is sufficient cause for grant of an order for stay of execution proceedings in HCCS No. 0930 of 2017 pending determination of civil appeal No. 0095 of 2022 arising from HCMA No. 0701 of 2021.
  2. Whether the Court lacks jurisdiction to grant an order of stay of execution where the applicant has not filed a notice of appeal against the decree sought to be stayed.
  3. Whether the instant application and civil appeal No. 0095 of 2022 have been overtaken by events.
  4. Whether the applicant is in contempt of the orders issued in HCCS No. 0930 of 2017.

Orders

  • Execution No. EMA-0256 of 2024 of the decree in HCCS No. 0930 of 2017 is stayed pending the determination of the Court of Appeal civil appeal No. 0095 of 2022.
  • The order for stay is made on the condition that the Applicant shall deposit a sum of UGX 149,250,000 into the security account of this Court being security for due performance of the decree, to be deposited within 60 days from the date of this order.
  • In the event of any default on the security deposit by the Applicant, the order for stay of execution shall lapse.
  • The costs of this application shall abide the outcome of the appeal.

Rules and key headnotes

Stay of Execution — Jurisdiction — Pending Appeal Against Interlocutory Order
A court has jurisdiction to grant a stay of execution of a final decree where a valid notice of appeal against an interlocutory order that excluded the applicant from participating in the proceedings is pending before the Court of Appeal, even where no appeal has been filed against the final decree itself.
Stay of Execution — Interlocutory Appeals — Mootness Doctrine
An appeal against an interlocutory order allowing a suit to proceed ex parte is not rendered moot by the subsequent delivery of judgment in the main suit where the applicant was effectively locked out of participating in the proceedings and had no notice of what transpired in the suit.
Stay of Execution — Conditions — Notice of Appeal
Rule 6(2)(b) of the Court of Appeal Rules, which provides for stay of execution where a notice of appeal has been lodged, is not limited to appeals against final judgments and decrees but extends to appeals against decisions of the High Court, including interlocutory orders.
Stay of Execution — Substantial Loss — Assessment
Substantial loss for purposes of stay of execution is a qualitative concept that refers to any loss great or small that is of real worth or value as distinguished from a loss without value or a loss that is merely nominal, and its determination depends on the context of each case.
Stay of Execution — Unreasonable Delay — Imminent Threat of Execution
An application for stay of execution filed within one month of notification that the decree holder has applied for execution is not made with unreasonable delay, as a judgment debtor must be under an imminent threat of execution to be entitled to an order of stay.
Stay of Execution — Security for Due Performance — Quantum
Where an applicant for stay of execution has not offered security for due performance of the decree, the court may order the deposit of security as a condition for the stay, and may assess the quantum at 25% of the total decretal sum including damages.

Legislation cited (6)

Cases cited (11)

  • Hon. Theodore Ssekikubo and Others v Attorney General and Others (Constitutional Application No. 0003 of 2024)
  • Gapco Uganda Ltd v Kaweesa and Another (HCMA No. 0259 of 2013)
  • Tropical Commodities Supplies Ltd and 2 Others v International Credit Bank Ltd (in liquidation) (2000) EA 331
  • Swatt Security Ltd v Genagri Plantation and 2 Others (HCMA No. 1462 of 2025)
  • Martin Yuko & Perez Lollah Shambe t/a Mapetch Enterprise v Nyali Capital Ltd (Civil Appeal No. 0130 of 2022) [2025] KEHC 2873
  • Housing Finance Bank Ltd and Another v Edward Musiisi (Civil Appeal No. 0158 of 2010)
  • Sitenda Sebalu v The Secretary General of East African Community (Reference No. 13 of 2022)
  • Paul Sentamule v Jane Musoke (CHT-00-LD-MA-0046 of 2024)
  • John Byekwaso and Another v Yudaya Ndagire (Civil Appeal No. 0078 of 2012)
  • Tropical Commodities Suppliers Ltd and Others v International Credit Bank Ltd (in liquidation) (HCMA No. 0379 of 2003)
  • Speke Hotel 1966 Limited (T/A Speke Hotel Apartments) v Sheila Nadege A.K.A Don Zeila (HCMA No. 0456 of 2022)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.

Adrian_Mubiru_v_Golden_Eagle_Complex_(Miscellaneous_Application_3053_of_2024)_[2025]_UGHCLD_350_(23_September_2025)
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.