Kibuuka Joseph v Kizito Francis Walubi and Others (CML Application No 0252 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

The single Justice dismissed the application for a stay of execution. The intended appeal was against an order directing the applicant's arrest and detention in civil prison for contempt; under section 76(1) of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 44 rules 1 and 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules such an order is not appealable as of right and requires leave of court. As no leave had been granted, the notice of appeal was incompetent and there was no valid pending appeal. Since the legal foundation of an application for stay of execution is a competent right of appeal, there was no basis on which the application could stand, and the court declined to exercise its discretion.

Outcome

Application for stay of execution dismissed with costs

Facts

The respondents had obtained a ruling in Miscellaneous Application No. 48 of 2022 in the High Court at Masaka committing the applicant to civil prison for three months for contempt of a court order, striking him off Civil Suit No. 02 of 2017 as a claimant, dismissing his claim and awarding costs. The applicant filed Civil Appeal No. 193 of 2023 challenging the contempt findings, and brought the present application to stay execution of the taxed costs arising from Application No. 48 of 2022 pending that appeal. He contended he risked detention in execution of the taxed costs and would suffer irreparable loss. The respondents replied that an appeal against a contempt order required leave of court, which had not been obtained, so no valid appeal existed; further that the taxation was concluded, no execution by arrest had been preferred, the outstanding costs were merely pecuniary, and no security for due performance had been furnished.

Issues

1. Whether an appeal against an order for arrest and detention for civil contempt, filed without leave of court, can found a valid pending appeal.
2. Whether the applicant had established the conditions for a stay of execution pending appeal.

Orders

• Application dismissed.
• Costs awarded to the respondents.

Rules and key headnotes

Legislation cited (10)

• Judicature Act s.33
• Judicature Act s.11
• Judicature Act s.10
• Judicature (Court of Appeal Rules) Directions, Rule 6(2)(b)
• Judicature (Court of Appeal Rules) Directions, Rule 2(2)
• Civil Procedure Act s.98
• Civil Procedure Act s.75
• Civil Procedure Act s.76(1)
• Civil Procedure Rules Order 52
• Civil Procedure Rules Order 44 rules 1 and 2

Cases cited (6)

• Lawrence Musiitwa Kyazze v Eunice Busingye (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 18 of 1990)
• Remegio Obwana v The Registered Trustees of Tororo Diocese (Supreme Court Civil Application No. 14 of 2021)
• Hon. Theodore Ssekikubo and Others v Attorney General (Constitutional Application No. 06 of 2013)
• Jingo Livingstone Mukasa v Hope Rwagumo (Civil Appeal No. 190 of 2015)
• Attorney General Vs Silver Springs Hotel Ltd & Others SCCA NO.1 1989
• Lukwago Erias v KCCA (Supreme Court Civil Application No. 06 of 2014)

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.

• Alex Kanyonyi Kaaya and Another v Uganda Development Bank and Others (Miscellaneous Application 156 of 2026)

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