Wakilii

Katuube John v Opwaka Moses (Miscellaneous Application No. 168 of 2024)

High Court · [2026] UGHC 405 · 2026 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for stay of execution pending appeal to the Court of Appeal
Decision
Application for stay of execution dismissed as premature

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 High Court dismissed an application for stay of execution pending appeal as premature. The court held that a stay of execution can only be granted where there is an existing decree or order capable of being executed. Since the application for consequential orders was still pending and no decree had been issued, there was nothing to stay. The filing of an application for consequential orders is not itself an act of execution.

Outcome

Application for stay of execution dismissed as premature

Facts

The applicant, Katuube John, was the successful party in Civil Suit No. 59 of 2016. The respondent, Opwaka Moses, appealed to the High Court in Civil Appeal No. 155 of 2022, where judgment was given in favour of the respondent, overturning the trial court's decision. The respondent then filed Miscellaneous Application No. 139 of 2024 seeking consequential orders for the applicant to vacate the suit land. That application remained pending. The applicant filed an appeal to the Court of Appeal (Civil Appeal No. 0846 of 2024) against the High Court's decision in Civil Appeal No. 155 of 2022. While that appeal was pending, the applicant brought the instant application seeking to stay execution of the High Court's judgment and orders pending determination of his appeal.

Issues

  1. Whether the application warrants stay of execution?
  2. Whether the application for stay of execution is premature in the absence of a decree or order capable of being executed?

Orders

  • Application dismissed.
  • Costs awarded to the respondent.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Stay of Execution — Prematurity — Application for Stay Before Decree Issued
A stay of execution can only be granted where there is an existing decree or order capable of being executed. In the absence of such a decree or order, an application for stay is premature and incompetent.
Civil Procedure — Consequential Orders — Distinction from Execution
The filing of an application for consequential orders is not, in itself, an act of execution. It is a step to obtain an order or decree that may later be executed. Consequential orders are ancillary to the principal decree and until such orders are granted, there is no decree or order capable of execution.
Civil Procedure — Stay of Execution — Applicable Legal Provisions
Applications for stay of execution pending appeal to the Court of Appeal are governed by Order 22 Rule 23(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules, not Order 43 Rule 4(2), which applies to appeals pending in the High Court. However, citing a wrong law is not fatal to an application as the right law can always be cited.

Legislation cited (5)

Cases cited (5)

  • Lawrence Musiitwa Kyazze v Eunice Busingye (SCCA No. 18 of 1990)
  • Hon Theodore Ssekikubo and Others v The Attorney General and Others (Constitutional Application No. 06 of 2011)
  • Gashumba Maniraguha v Sam Nkudiye (SCC Application No. 24 of 2015)
  • Obayagbona V Obazee [1970] 5 SC 247
  • Odofin V Agu [1992] LPELR 2225 (SC); [1992] NWLR (Pt 229) 35

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Katuube John v Opwaka Moses (Miscellaneous Application No. 168 of 2024) [2026] UGHC 405 (6 March 2026)
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.