Wakilii

Banga Michael Ssemugabi and Another v Cairo Bank Uganda (Miscellaneous Application No. 1051 of 2024)

High Court · [2025] UGCOMMC 321 · 2025 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for temporary injunction arising from civil suit for breach of mortgage agreement
Decision
Application for temporary injunction dismissed as overtaken by events following sale and transfer of mortgaged property

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 dismissed the application for temporary injunction. Where applicants failed to comply with a prior conditional interim injunction requiring payment of 30% of the outstanding loan amount, and the mortgaged property was subsequently sold and transferred to a third party, the application was overtaken by events. The applicants failed to establish a prima facie case, as they were no longer registered proprietors and there was no imminent sale to restrain. The principle of ut pendente nihil innovetur did not apply where the sale occurred as a predicted consequence of the applicants' non-compliance with court orders. The applicants, having failed to adhere to court orders, could not seek relief with unclean hands.

Outcome

Application for temporary injunction dismissed as overtaken by events following sale and transfer of mortgaged property

Facts

The applicants obtained a loan facility from the respondent bank secured by two parcels of land including Block 244 Plot 4646 Kyadondo at Kisugu. Following default on loan repayment, the respondent advertised the property for sale. The applicants filed Civil Suit No. 624 of 2024 and two miscellaneous applications. In Miscellaneous Application No. 1053 of 2024, the court granted interim injunction contingent upon payment of 30% of the outstanding loan amount or forced sale value within 45 days. The applicants failed to meet this condition. The respondent re-advertised and sold the mortgaged property to Dr. Byarugaba Jover, with the certificate of title transferred to her name. The applicants then sought temporary injunction in the present application to restrain the respondent from selling the property, despite the sale having already occurred.

Issues

  1. Whether the application for temporary injunction should be granted where the mortgaged property has already been sold and transferred to a third party.
  2. Whether the applicants' failure to comply with a prior conditional interim injunction order bars them from obtaining relief in the present application.
  3. Whether the sale of the suit property during pending litigation violated the principle of ut pendente nihil innovetur.

Orders

  • Application dismissed.
  • No order as to costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Temporary Injunction — Application Overtaken by Events — Sale of Property Pending Litigation
Where mortgaged property has already been sold and transferred to a third party before determination of an application for temporary injunction, the application is overtaken by events and must be dismissed, as the primary purpose of preventing the sale no longer exists and preservation of the status quo would serve no purpose.
Temporary Injunction — Prima Facie Case — Elements Required in Mortgage Sale Cases
To establish a prima facie case for temporary injunction restraining sale of mortgaged property, an applicant must show: (i) the applicant is the registered proprietor of the suit land; (ii) the applicant mortgaged the suit land to the respondent; (iii) the respondent intends to sell the suit land; and (iv) the applicant is likely to suffer damage or loss as a result of the imminent sale. Where the property has been sold and transferred, these elements cannot be satisfied and no prima facie case exists.
Temporary Injunction — Clean Hands Doctrine — Non-Compliance with Prior Court Orders
An applicant who has failed to comply with a prior conditional interim injunction order is estopped from seeking relief in a subsequent application for temporary injunction. Such conduct constitutes abuse of court processes, and the principle that a party must come to court with clean hands bars the grant of relief.
Ut Pendente Nihil Innovetur — Inapplicability Where Sale Follows Non-Compliance with Court Order
The principle of ut pendente nihil innovetur, which prevents transfers of suit property during pending litigation, does not apply where a court has granted conditional interim protection and the applicant fails to comply with the conditions. Where the sale occurs as a predicted consequence of non-compliance with court orders, the principle affords no protection.

Legislation cited (7)

Cases cited (9)

  • Alpha2 Business Company Limited v Diamond Trust Bank Ltd and 2 Others (Miscellaneous Application No. 0071 of 2016)
  • E.A. Industries v. Trufoods, [1972] E.A. 420
  • Fellowes and Son v. Fisher [1976] I QB 122
  • American Cyanamid Co v. Ethicon Limited [1975] AC 396
  • Geilla v Cassman Brown Co. Ltd [1973] E.A. 358
  • GAPCO Uganda Limited v Kaweesa and Another (Miscellaneous Application No. 259 of 2013)
  • Godfrey Sekitoleko and four others v. Seezi Peter Mutabazi and two others, [2001 -2005] HCB 80
  • Nsubuga and another v. Mutawe [1974] E.A 487
  • City Council of Kampala v Donozio Musisi Sekyaya (Civil Application No. 3 of 2000)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Banga Michael Ssemugabi and Another v Cairo Bank Uganda (Miscellaneous Application No. 1051 of 2024) [2025] UGCommC 321 (31 August 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.