Bulamu Mwetegaine Kiiza & Anor v Zephania Kadooba Kiiza (Miscellaneous Application No.930 of 2007) (Miscellaneous Application No.930 of 2007)
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 granted a stay of execution without requiring payment of security. The applicants had filed a notice of appeal without undue delay and would suffer substantial loss if execution proceeded, while the respondent would suffer no prejudice except missing costs. Requiring security would defeat the purpose of granting the stay.
Outcome
Stay of execution granted without security pending appeal
Facts
The applicants applied for a stay of execution arising from Civil Appeal No. 10 of 2005. They had filed a notice of appeal and contended that they would suffer a miscarriage of justice if the stay was not granted. The application was brought under Order 51 rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules and supported by affidavit. The respondent did not file any reply to the application. When the matter was called for hearing, counsel for the respondent was absent despite being notified, and the application proceeded ex parte. The respondent was in possession of disputed property and a bill of costs had been taxed at UGX 5,504,700.
Issues
- Whether the applicants satisfied the conditions for granting a stay of execution.
- Whether security should be required for granting the stay of execution.
Orders
- Application for stay of execution granted.
- Stay granted without payment of security.
- No order as to costs.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (1)
Cases cited (1)
- DFCU Bank Ltd v Dr Ann Persis Nakate Lusejjere (Court of Appeal Civil Application No. 29 of 2003)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.