Wakilii

Kawwoya Joseph v Joseph Kalangirire Serujogi (Miscellaneous Application 53 of 2023)

High Court · [2025] UGHC 794 · 2025 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for stay of execution of decree and taxed costs pending determination of appeal in the Court of Appeal
Decision
Stay of execution granted conditionally upon deposit of security for due performance of the decree within 45 days

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 granted a stay of execution of the decree and taxed costs pending determination of the appeal in the Court of Appeal. The court held that citing incorrect procedural law does not invalidate proceedings where substantive justice requires otherwise and no prejudice is caused. The application was not time-barred as it was filed promptly after service of the notice to show cause. The applicant satisfied the requirements for stay by demonstrating a pending appeal, substantial loss if execution proceeded, and absence of unreasonable delay. The court ordered the applicant to deposit the taxed costs amount as security within 45 days.

Outcome

Stay of execution granted conditionally upon deposit of security for due performance of the decree within 45 days

Facts

The applicant's appeal (Civil Appeal No. 24 of 2019) was dismissed on 4 September 2020 for being filed out of time without leave. Costs were taxed at UGX 5,335,000 on 21 October 2020. The applicant lodged an appeal to the Court of Appeal (Civil Appeal No. 31 of 2021) on 4 February 2021. Despite knowledge of the pending appeal, the respondent commenced execution proceedings and issued notices to show cause in February 2021, 31 March 2022, and 6 March 2023. The applicant filed this application on 17 March 2023 seeking stay of execution pending determination of the Court of Appeal appeal. The respondent opposed, arguing the application was defective, time-barred, and that the appeal had no merit as it did not address the dismissal for late filing.

Issues

  1. Whether the application is defective and an abuse of court process
  2. Whether the application for stay is time-barred
  3. Whether a stay of execution should be granted pending determination of the appeal

Orders

  • Execution of the decree and taxed costs in Civil Appeal No. 24 of 2019 and Taxation Cause No. 12 of 2020 is stayed pending determination of Court of Appeal Civil Appeal No. 31 of 2021.
  • The Applicant shall deposit UGX 5,335,000 (Uganda Shillings Five Million Three Hundred Thirty-Five Thousand) taxed costs in this Court as security for due performance of the decree in Civil Appeal No. 24 of 2019 within 45 days of this ruling.
  • In the event of any default in regard to the order in (2) above, execution of the decree and taxed costs in Civil Appeal No. 24 of 2019 and Taxation Cause No. 12 of 2020 shall commence.
  • The Applicant shall make all efforts to ensure he prosecutes his appeal at the earliest.
  • Costs of this application shall abide the outcome of the Civil Appeal No. 31 of 2021.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Stay of Execution — Procedural Defects — Effect of Citing Wrong Law
Citing an incorrect law or using the wrong procedure does not automatically invalidate proceedings where the court has jurisdiction, the substance of the application is clear, and no prejudice is caused to the respondent. Substantive justice prevails over procedural form.
Civil Procedure — Stay of Execution — Time Limits — Unreasonable Delay
Order 43 rule 4(3) of the Civil Procedure Rules does not impose a strict time bar for applications for stay of execution pending appeal but requires that the application be made without unreasonable delay. An application filed 11 days after service of a notice to show cause does not constitute unreasonable delay.
Civil Procedure — Stay of Execution — Substantial Loss — Taxed Costs
Substantial loss for purposes of stay of execution is a qualitative concept referring to any loss of real worth or value, not merely nominal loss. Where taxed costs are both a consequence of the judgment being appealed and a subject of the appeal itself, failure to grant stay may cause substantial loss and render the appeal nugatory.
Civil Procedure — Stay of Execution — Security for Due Performance — Discretion of Court
Where an applicant has not provided security for due performance of the decree as required by Order 43 rule 4(3)(c) of the Civil Procedure Rules, the court may in the interest of justice exercise its discretion to grant stay conditionally, allowing the applicant an opportunity to deposit security within a specified time.

Legislation cited (11)

Cases cited (14)

  • Tullow Uganda Ltd & Anor v Jackson Wabyona & Uganda Revenue Authority (Miscellaneous Application No. 197 of 2017)
  • Boyes v Gathure [1969] 1 EA 385
  • Saggu v Roadmaster Cycles (U) Ltd [2002] 1 EA 258
  • Re Christine Namatovu Tebajjukira [1992-93] HCB 85
  • Attorney General and Uganda Land Commission v James Mark Kamoga and Anor (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 8 of 2004)
  • Hon Theodore Ssekikuubo & Others v Attorney General & Others (Constitutional Application No. 3 of 2014)
  • Attorney General v East African Law Society & Another (EACJ Application No. 1 of 2013)
  • Equity Bank (U) Ltd v Nicholas Were (High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 604 of 2013)
  • Tropical Commodities Suppliers Ltd & Others v International Credit Bank Ltd (In Liquidation) (Miscellaneous Application No. 379 of 2003)
  • DFCU Bank Ltd v Dr Ann Persis Nakate Lusejjere (Civil Application No. 29 of 2003)
  • Junaco (T) Limited and Ors v DFCU Bank Limited (Miscellaneous Application No. 27 of 2023)
  • Shem Mpanga Mukasa & Anor v Kizza Clessy Barya (Miscellaneous Application No. 479 of 2021)
  • Kisaalu Joseph & 10 Others v Nakintu May & Anor (Miscellaneous Application No. 105 of 2020)
  • Nzeirwe Enid v Orikiriza Frank alias Orija (Miscellaneous Application No. 21 of 2023)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Kawwoya Joseph v Joseph Kalangirire Serujogi (Miscellaneous Application 53 of 2023) [2025] UGHC 794 (26 August 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.