Wakilii

Emmejje and Another v Asegoit (Civil Application 35 of 2024)

Court of Appeal · [2024] UGCA 116 · 2024 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application before a single Judge of the Court of Appeal for an interim order of stay of execution pending the disposal of a substantive application for stay of execution.
Decision
Interim order of stay of execution granted pending disposal of the substantive application for stay of execution

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

A single Judge of the Court of Appeal granted an interim order of stay of execution. The Court applied the established principles that, for an interim order, it suffices to show that a substantive application for stay is pending and that there is a serious threat of execution before that application is heard. The applicants had lodged a notice of appeal, a substantive stay application (Civil Application No. 24 of 2024) was pending, and the respondent had obtained a garnishee order and pursued further execution, demonstrating a serious threat. The interim stay was granted until disposal of the substantive application, with costs to abide the main cause.

Outcome

Interim order of stay of execution granted pending disposal of the substantive application for stay of execution

Facts

The 2nd applicant is an appellant in a pending Court of Appeal civil appeal concerning the estate of the late Martin Okacuga. The Standard Gauge Railway Project paid compensation of about UGX 227,000,000 to the estate for affected property, to be shared among the beneficiaries. The respondent, one of the late Martin Okacuga's widows whose house was affected by the project, filed an application in the Tororo High Court claiming entitlement to the compensation. The High Court ordered that the monies be paid to the respondent. The applicants filed a notice of appeal and an appeal, and applied for a stay of execution in the High Court, which was dismissed. The respondent then obtained a garnishee order and took UGX 100,000,000 from the estate account, pursued execution of taxed costs, and obtained contempt orders against the applicants. The applicants filed a substantive application for stay of execution and this interim application.

Issues

  1. Whether the applicants satisfied the conditions for the grant of an interim order of stay of execution pending the disposal of the substantive application for stay of execution.

Orders

  • An interim order of stay of execution of the orders in Tororo High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 279 of 2022 is granted until the disposal of Court of Appeal Civil Application No. 24 of 2024.
  • Costs of this application shall abide the main cause.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Stay of Execution — Interim Order — Conditions for Grant
For the grant of an interim order of stay of execution it suffices to show that a substantive application for stay of execution is pending and that there is a serious threat of execution before the hearing of that substantive application; it is not necessary to pre-empt the matters to be considered in deciding the substantive application.
Civil Procedure — Stay of Execution — Notice of Appeal — Precondition
An applicant for a stay of execution must first show that a notice of appeal has been lodged in accordance with the Rules of Court before a stay can be granted.
Civil Procedure — Stay of Execution — Serious Threat of Execution
A serious threat of execution is established where the respondent has obtained a garnishee order against the applicants' account and has applied for further execution of taxed costs, particularly where the underlying facts are undisputed.

Legislation cited (4)

  • Judicature (Court of Appeal Rules) Directions r.6(2)(b)
  • Judicature (Court of Appeal Rules) Directions r.43
  • Judicature (Court of Appeal Rules) Directions r.2
  • Rules of the Supreme Court r.76

Cases cited (3)

  • Hwang Sung Industries Ltd v Tajdin Hussein and 2 Others (Civil Application No. 19 of 2008)
  • Dr. Ahmed Muhammed Kisuule v Greenland Bank (In Liquidation) (Miscellaneous Application No. 7 of 2010)
  • Mugenyi v National Insurance Corporation (Civil Appeal No. 13 of 1984)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Emmejje and Another v Asegoit (Civil Application 35 of 2024) [2024] UGCA 116 (7 May 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.