Wakilii

Finance Access Commerce and Trade Services (U) Limited v Aster Pharma Limited (Miscellaneous Application No. 1929 of 2024)

High Court · [2025] UGCOMMC 528 · 2025 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for stay of execution of decree pending appeal to the Court of Appeal
Decision
Application for stay of execution dismissed

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

Application for stay of execution pending appeal dismissed. Court held that applicant failed to satisfy mandatory criteria for stay of execution: no evidence of imminent threat of execution, no proof of substantial loss, and no security offered in the affidavit in support. While notice of appeal was filed without unreasonable delay and applicant expressed willingness to provide security in rejoinder, failure to meet all five grounds rendered the application devoid of merit.

Outcome

Application for stay of execution dismissed

Facts

Applicant filed consolidated civil suits against Durogreen Investments Limited and Aster Pharma Limited to recover money from assigned receivables. Court found for applicant against Durogreen but dismissed suit against Aster Pharma Limited with costs, holding applicant had sued the wrong party (should have sued Aster Investments (U) Ltd instead). Applicant filed notice of appeal on 3 September 2024 challenging the judgment regarding Aster Pharma. On 19 September 2024, applicant filed this application seeking stay of execution of the decree pending determination of the intended appeal. Respondent filed bill of costs. Applicant argued respondent's filing of bill of costs indicated imminent threat of execution.

Issues

  1. Whether the application meets the criteria for the orders sought?
  2. What remedies are available?

Orders

  • Application dismissed with costs to the Respondent.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Stay of Execution — Mandatory Criteria
For an application for stay of execution pending appeal to succeed, the applicant must satisfy five mandatory grounds: (1) a notice of appeal has been filed; (2) the application has been made without unreasonable delay; (3) there is serious or imminent threat of execution; (4) substantial loss may occur unless stay is granted; and (5) the applicant has given security for due performance of the decree.
Civil Procedure — Stay of Execution — Burden of Proof — Imminent Threat
The party alleging imminent threat of execution bears the evidential burden to prove that fact. A mere assertion that the respondent has filed a bill of costs, without more, does not constitute evidence of imminent threat of execution.
Civil Procedure — Stay of Execution — Substantial Loss
Substantial loss is a qualitative concept referring to any loss of real worth or value, as distinguished from nominal loss. An applicant must adduce evidence to prove substantial loss; failure to prove imminent threat of execution undermines the claim of substantial loss.
Civil Procedure — Stay of Execution — Security for Performance
An applicant for stay of execution must indicate in the affidavit in support a willingness to provide security for due performance of the decree. Expressing willingness to provide security only in the affidavit in rejoinder does not satisfy this mandatory requirement.

Legislation cited (6)

Cases cited (7)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Finance Access Commerce and Trade Services (U) Limited v Aster Pharma Limited (Miscellaneous Application No. 1929 of 2024) [2025] UGCommC 528 (31 December 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.