Wakilii

Bindeeba v Rwantebe and Another (Civil Application 1005 of 2023)

Court of Appeal · [2024] UGCA 23 · 2024 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application to a single Justice of the Court of Appeal for a stay of execution pending appeal
Decision
Stay of execution granted pending disposal of Civil Appeal No. 74 of 2023

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

On an application to a single Justice for a stay of execution pending appeal, the Court held that the decree was executable: although the suit had been dismissed without declaring the respondents owners, the decision conferred on them rights they acted upon by destroying the applicant's banana plantation. Applying the established conditions for a stay, the Court found the appeal raised a serious, non-frivolous question with a prima facie likelihood of success, and that loss of the applicant's residential land amounted to irreparable, substantial loss not compensable in money. As the first two conditions were satisfied, the balance of convenience need not be considered. A stay of execution was granted pending disposal of the appeal.

Outcome

Stay of execution granted pending disposal of Civil Appeal No. 74 of 2023

Facts

The applicant filed HCCS No. 26 of 2020 seeking general and aggravated damages for trespass to land (a kibanja) in Kinota, Rakai district, and obtained a temporary injunction. At trial the respondents' counsel was absent and the matter proceeded ex parte, yet the court dismissed the suit, finding the applicant had not lawfully acquired the disputed property because he bought from a seller who lacked letters of probate over the deceased's estate. The applicant maintained the seller had inherited the land and that it was a gift inter vivos outside the estate. The suit was dismissed with no order as to costs. The applicant appealed (Civil Appeal No. 74 of 2023) and sought a stay; the High Court at Masaka declined, holding the decree was not executable. Following the dismissal, the respondents destroyed the applicant's banana plantation (about 2.72 acres) and grazed cattle on the land, asserting ownership. The applicant's home stood on the suit land.

Issues

  1. Whether the decree dismissing the underlying suit was capable of execution so as to found an application for a stay of execution.
  2. Whether the applicant satisfied the conditions for the grant of a stay of execution pending appeal.

Orders

  • A stay of execution doth issue staying the judgment, orders and decree in High Court Civil Appeal No. 26 of 2020 until disposal of Civil Appeal No. 74 of 2023.
  • Interim application No. 1006 of 2023, earlier withdrawn by the applicant, stands dismissed.
  • The costs of this application and application No. 1005 of 2023 shall abide the result of the appeal.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Stay of Execution — Jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal
Under Rule 6(2)(b) of the Rules of the Court of Appeal, where a notice of appeal has been lodged, the Court may order a stay of execution in civil proceedings on such terms as it thinks just, the institution of an appeal not itself operating to stay execution.
Civil Procedure — Stay of Execution — Conditions for Grant
An applicant for a stay of execution pending appeal must establish a likelihood of success or a prima facie case on the right of appeal, that he will suffer irreparable damage or that the appeal will be rendered nugatory if a stay is refused, and that the application was brought without delay; only where the first two are not established does the court turn to the balance of convenience.
Civil Procedure — Stay of Execution — Executability of a Decree of Dismissal
A decree that dismisses a suit, without declaring the successful party the lawful owner, may nonetheless be executable where the decision confers on that party rights which they act upon to the irreparable detriment of the applicant.
Land & Property — Land as Irreparable Loss — Substantial Loss
The loss of land used as one's residence constitutes substantial loss that cannot be quantified by monetary compensation and amounts to irreparable damage for the purposes of granting a stay of execution.

Legislation cited (5)

  • Rules of the Court of Appeal rule 2(2)
  • Rules of the Court of Appeal rule 6(b)
  • Rules of the Court of Appeal rule 6(2)(b)
  • Rules of the Court of Appeal rule 43(1)
  • Rules of the Court of Appeal rule 72

Cases cited (7)

  • Francis Nansio Micah v Nuwa Walakira (Civil Appeal No. 9 of 1990)
  • George Ruyondo v Muriisa Nicholas (Election Application No. 39 of 2011)
  • Lawrence Musiitwa Kyazze v Eunice Busingye (Civil Appeal No. 18 of 1990)
  • Ssekikubo and Others v Attorney General and Others (Constitutional Application No. 3 of 2014)
  • Gapco Uganda Ltd v Kaweesa and Another (Miscellaneous Application No. 259 of 2018)
  • American Cyanamid Co v Ethicon Ltd (1975) WCR 316
  • Tropical Commodities Suppliers Ltd & Ors v International Credit Bank Ltd (in liquidation) [2004] 2 EA 331

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Bindeeba v Rwantebe and Another (Civil Application 1005 of 2023) [2024] UGCA 23 (31 January 2024)
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.