Wakilii

Kiirya Moses and Others v Byaruhanga Ojok Victor and Others (Miscellaneous Application No. 032 of 2024)

High Court · [2026] UGHC 544 · 2026 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for stay of execution of contempt orders pending leave to appeal and intended appeal
Decision
Application dismissed; applicants remain in contempt and must purge themselves before seeking further relief

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 court held that a party found in contempt of court cannot seek relief from the same court until they have purged themselves of contempt by fully complying with the court's orders. The applicants failed to provide valid reasons for their non-compliance with contempt orders in HCMA No. 051 of 2023. The principle that he who seeks equity must have clean hands applies. The application for stay of execution was dismissed with costs.

Outcome

Application dismissed; applicants remain in contempt and must purge themselves before seeking further relief

Facts

The applicants were found in contempt of court in HCMA No. 051 of 2023 and ordered to pay general damages of UGX 6,000,000 plus costs. The 1st and 2nd applicants paid their shares of damages (UGX 1,500,000 each), and the 4th applicant made a partial payment of UGX 800,000. The 3rd applicant paid nothing. The 2nd applicant subsequently complied fully and was discharged from the proceedings. The applicants filed HCMA No. 009 of 2024 seeking leave to appeal the contempt finding. While that application was pending, they filed the present application seeking a stay of execution of the contempt orders. The respondents raised a preliminary objection that the applicants could not seek relief while still in contempt of court.

Issues

  1. Whether the applicants can seek a stay of execution of contempt orders before fully complying with those orders.
  2. Whether the applicants have provided sufficient reasons for non-compliance with the court's contempt orders to justify a temporary stay of execution.

Orders

  • The respondents' preliminary objection is upheld.
  • Miscellaneous Application No. 032 of 2024 is dismissed with costs.
  • The 2nd applicant is discharged from the application.
  • Costs to be borne by the 1st, 3rd, and 4th applicants.
  • Miscellaneous Application No. 033 of 2024 is also dismissed with costs.
  • The 2nd applicant in Miscellaneous Application No. 033 of 2024 is discharged.
  • Costs in Miscellaneous Application No. 033 of 2024 to be borne by the 1st, 3rd, and 4th applicants.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Contempt of Court — Stay of Execution — Clean Hands Doctrine
A party found in contempt of court by disobeying an existing court order cannot be heard in a different but related cause or motion unless and until such person has purged himself or herself of the contempt by fully complying with the court's orders.
Civil Procedure — Contempt of Court — Compliance with Court Orders — Duty to Obey
A party who knows of a court order, regardless of whether in that party's view the order is null or valid, regular or irregular, cannot be permitted to disobey it. The order must be complied with in totality and in all circumstances, subject to the party's right to challenge the order by way of revision, review, or appeal.
Civil Procedure — Stay of Execution — Contempt Orders — Requirement to Show Cause for Non-Compliance
When seeking a stay of execution of contempt orders, the applicant must provide substantive reasons explaining why they have not yet complied with the orders and why granting a temporary stay is essential. Merely stating an intention to appeal is insufficient.
Civil Procedure — Appeals — Contempt Orders — Requirement to Purge Contempt Before Appeal
An appeal against contempt orders can only be considered once the parties in contempt have first purged themselves of the contempt they wish to challenge. It would be illogical for a court to prevent applicants from purging themselves and complying with orders while their appeal is pending.

Legislation cited (7)

Cases cited (7)

  • Housing Finance Bank Limited and Another v Musisi (Miscellaneous Application No. 158 of 2010)
  • C.ivudk V Cremer (1 Corp Jemp 342)
  • Wildlife Lodges Limited v County Council of Narok and Another [2005] 2 EA 344 (HCK)
  • Hadkinson v Hadkinson [1952] 2 All ER 575
  • Mawani v Mawani [1974] KLR 159
  • Court of Appeal Constitutional Court of Uganda Application No.19 of 2011: Musisi & AncrvNamugeuyi Margaret, Unreported
  • Okello and Others v The Hospital Management Board Lira Regional Referral Hospital and Others (Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 0071 of 2018)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Kiirya Moses and Others v Byaruhanga Ojok Victor and Others (Miscellaneous Application No. 032 of 2024) [2026] UGHC 544 (28 April 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.