Wakilii

Babulal Davesh and Irene Blick Aretha (All) ta The Executive Committee of the Federation of Motorsports Clubs Uganda v Nsamba Ceofriy [2026] UGCA 17

Court of Appeal · 2026 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for stay of execution and injunction pending determination of a civil appeal
Decision
Application for stay of execution dismissed with costs to the respondent

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 Court of Appeal dismissed the applicants' motion for a stay of execution pending appeal. It held the application was incompetent because no similar application had first been made in the High Court as required by rule 42(1), the High Court's prerogative judicial review orders (certiorari, prohibition, mandamus) are self-executing and incapable of being stayed, and the applicants—being former executive committee members—lacked capacity to bring the application. The court further found the applicants failed to satisfy the conditions for a stay, had shown no irreparable damage attributable to the respondent, and approached the court without clean hands as unpurged contemnors. The application was dismissed with costs.

Outcome

Application for stay of execution dismissed with costs to the respondent

Facts

The respondent obtained prerogative orders of certiorari, prohibition and mandamus in a consolidated judicial review cause against the executive committee of the Federation of Motorsports Clubs Uganda (FMU-UG), quashing decisions to convene an extraordinary general assembly and directing a fresh assembly. The High Court also condemned two committee members in damages for contempt arising from elections held while the matter was pending. The applicants filed a notice and memorandum of appeal (Civil Appeal No. 650 of 2024) and unsuccessfully sought a stay in the High Court (Misc. Application No. 1277 of 2024, dismissed). They then brought a fresh application in the Court of Appeal seeking to restrain the respondent from interfering with FMU-UG's management and from freezing its bank accounts. The accounts had in fact been frozen on the order of the Inspector General of Government, following the respondent informing the IGG of the High Court order, and FMU-UG faced an international ban for unpaid subscriptions. The respondent had never applied to execute the High Court orders.

Issues

  1. Whether the application for stay of execution is properly before the Court of Appeal.
  2. Whether the applicants have the legal capacity (locus standi) to institute the application.
  3. Whether there are sufficient grounds warranting the grant of a stay of execution.
  4. What remedies are available to the parties.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed with costs to the respondent.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Stay of Execution — Application to be Made First in the High Court
An application for stay of execution that may be made either in the Court of Appeal or the High Court must first be made in the High Court under rule 42(1) of the Court of Appeal Rules, and where the application filed in the appellate court materially differs in the orders it seeks from the one filed below, no similar application has been made first to the High Court.
Judicial Review — Prerogative Orders — Whether Capable of Being Stayed
Prerogative judicial review orders of certiorari, prohibition and mandamus are self-executing; no warrant of execution can issue to enforce them, and they are therefore not capable of being the subject of a stay of execution.
Civil Procedure — Stay of Execution — Conditions for Grant
Before granting a stay of execution pending appeal the court must be satisfied that a notice of appeal has been lodged, the appeal is not frivolous and has a likelihood of success, there is a serious imminent threat of execution, the application was made without unreasonable delay, the applicant is prepared to give security for due performance of the decree, refusal would inflict greater hardship than it would avoid, and the applicant would suffer irreparable damage if relief is denied.
Judicial Review — Appeals — Right of Appeal from Section 40 Judicature Act Decisions
Decisions of the High Court made under section 40 of the Judicature Act in judicial review are appealable to the Court of Appeal as of right, and an applicant does not require leave to lodge such an appeal.
Civil Procedure — Equitable Relief — Clean Hands — Unpurged Contempt
A court will decline to exercise its discretion to grant the equitable remedy of a stay of execution in favour of applicants who approach the court without clean hands, such as parties found in contempt and condemned in damages who have neither purged the contempt nor appealed against that order.
Civil Procedure — Locus Standi — Former Office Holder Representing a Body
A person who by his own admission has ceased to hold office and is now only an ordinary member of a body lacks the capacity to institute an application purporting to act as that body's executive committee.

Legislation cited (8)

Cases cited (8)

  • Lawrence Musitwa Kyazze v Eunice Busingye (Civil Application No. 18 of 1990)
  • Gashumba Maniraguha v Sam Nkudiye (Civil Application No. 24 of 2015)
  • Kyambogo University v Prof. Isaiah Omolo Ndiege (Civil Application No. 314 of 2013)
  • National Housing & Construction Corporation v Kampala District Land Board (Civil Appeal No. 6 of 2002)
  • Hwang Sung Industries v Tadjudin Hussein & Ors (Civil Appeal No. 19 of 2008)
  • Orient Bank v Zabwe & Ors (Miscellaneous Application No. 19 of 2007)
  • Emaku Joseph & Anor v Emulu of Amuge Charles (Civil Application No. 76 of 2024)
  • Pius Niwagaba v Law Development Centre (Civil Application No. 18 of 2006)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Babulal Davesh and Irene Blick Aretha (All) ta The Executive Committee of the Federation of Motorsports Clubs Uganda v Nsamba Ceofriy 2026 UGCA 17 (12 February 2026)
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.