Jomayi Property Consultants Limited v NC Bank Uganda Limited (Civil Application 285 of 2024)

Observed later treatment

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.

Holding

On a single-justice application for stay of execution and stay of winding-up proceedings pending appeal, the Court held that where written law (Rules 2 and 6 of the Court of Appeal Rules) governs stay of execution it takes precedence over the foreign common-law principles on staying winding-up urged by the respondent. Although Rule 42 generally requires such applications to be filed in the High Court first, the Court could entertain it because the High Court had not heard an earlier application in time. The applicant satisfied the Supreme Court conditions: the memorandum of appeal raised a triable issue, and the threatened winding-up and appointment of a liquidator was irreparable loss not atonable in damages. The application was granted.

Outcome

Application granted; execution and winding-up proceedings stayed pending the disposal of the applicant's appeal

Facts

The respondent bank served a statutory demand on the applicant company on 23 January 2020 for UGX 868,250,000. On 20 February 2020 the applicant filed Miscellaneous Cause No. 43 of 2020 seeking to extend time within which to apply to set aside the statutory demand. Before that was disposed of, the respondent filed Company Cause No. 5 of 2020 on 4 May 2020 seeking, among other orders, that the applicant be wound up and a liquidator appointed over its assets. The two causes were consolidated. On 27 April 2024 the High Court decided the consolidated matter in favour of the respondent. The applicant lodged a notice of appeal and a memorandum of appeal challenging the insolvency orders. Faced with a winding-up order it contended was self-executing, and an earlier High Court stay application that had not been heard, the applicant applied to the Court of Appeal for a stay of execution and of the winding-up proceedings pending the appeal.

Issues

1. Whether the application for stay of execution and stay of winding-up proceedings was competently before the Court of Appeal, or ought first to have been made to the High Court under Rule 42.
2. Whether the foreign common-law principles governing the stay of winding-up proceedings, or the written Court of Appeal Rules, applied to the application.
3. Whether the applicant satisfied the conditions for the grant of a stay of execution pending the disposal of its appeal.
4. Whether the applicant should be ordered to provide security for due performance.

Orders

• The application is granted.
• Execution of the Ruling and Orders of the High Court in Miscellaneous Cause No. 0043 of 2020 consolidated with Company Cause No. 5 of 2020 be stayed pending the disposal of the Applicant's appeal.
• An order staying winding-up proceedings and appointment of a liquidator arising from the High Court orders in Miscellaneous Cause No. 0043 of 2020 consolidated with Company Cause No. 5 of 2020, pending the disposal of the Applicant's appeal.
• Costs will follow the outcome of the appeal.

Rules and key headnotes

Legislation cited (7)

• Judicature (Court of Appeal) Rules SI 13-10 r.2(2)
• Judicature (Court of Appeal) Rules SI 13-10 r.6(2)(b)
• Judicature (Court of Appeal) Rules SI 13-10 r.42
• Judicature (Court of Appeal) Rules SI 13-10 r.44
• Judicature (Court of Appeal) Rules SI 13-10 r.76
• Judicature Act s.14
• Insolvency Act 2011 s.264

Cases cited (19)

• Tropical Africa Bank Limited v Grace Were Mujjwana (Civil Application No. 87 of 2007)
• Hon. Theodore Sekikubo & 3 Others v Attorney General & 4 Others (Constitutional Application No. 6 of 2013)
• Gashumba Maniraguha v Sam Nkundiye (Civil Application No. 24 of 2015)
• Tropical Commodities Ltd & Ors v International Credit Bank Ltd (in Liquidation) [2004] 2 EA 331
• P.K Sengendo v Busuulwa Lawrence & Male Abdu (Civil Appeal No. 207 of 2014)
• Lawrence Musiitwa Kyazze v Eunice Busingye (Civil Application No. 18 of 1990)
• A&BC Chewing Gum Ltd [1975] 1 WLR 593
• Calgary and Edmonton Land Company Ltd [1975] 1 ALL ER 1046 [1975] 1 WLR 355
• Re Telescriptor Syndicate Ltd [1903] 2 Ch. 174 at 182
• Re A Private Company [1935] NZLR 120
• Re Mascot Home Furnishers Pty Ltd [1970] V R 535 at 598
• Advocates Coalition for Development & Environment & Others v Attorney General & Anor (Constitutional Petition No. 14 of 2011)
• Kyambogo University v Prof Isaiah Omolo Ndiege (Civil Application No. 341 of 2013)
• Dr. Ahamed Muhammed Kisuule v Greenland Bank (in Liquidation) (Miscellaneous Application No. 7 of 2010)
• Noble Builders (U) Limited & Anor v Jabal Sing Sandhu (Civil Appeal No. 15 of 2002)
• David Sejjako Nsubuga v Rebecca Musoke (Civil Appeal No. 12 of 1985)
• Rosemary Nalubega & Others v Jackson Kokayira (Civil Appeal No. 40 of 2004)
• Imperial Royale Hotel Ltd & 2 Others v Ochan Daniel (Miscellaneous Application No. 111 of 2012)
• Giella v Cassman Brown & Co. Ltd [1973] EA 358

Cases citing this judgment (1)

How later Ugandan judgments in the Wakilii corpus have cited this case. Treatment labels come from Sequitur — Uganda’s citator — each backed by a verbatim span from the citing judgment, and are not an assertion that this case is, or is not, good law.

• Uganda Law Society and Another v Mugisha Hashim Mugisha and Others (Civil Application 99 of 2025)

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