Kiiza v Bazalirwaki (Civil Application 657 of 2024)

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.

Holding

On an application to a single Justice for a stay of execution pending appeal, the court granted the stay, holding that the applicant had shown substantial loss (loss of his home and livelihood on the suit land cannot be compensated in money), that the application was filed without unreasonable delay, and that the intended appeal was neither frivolous nor vexatious and had a likelihood of success. The court refused, however, to annul or reverse the Registrar's cancellation of the certificate of title, which had already occurred before the application: a stay of execution operates prospectively to preserve the status quo, and reversing the cancellation would decide a ground of appeal, exceeding the jurisdiction of the single Justice and encroaching on the full bench.

Outcome

Application succeeds in part: stay of execution granted and respondent restrained from selling the suit land pending appeal; prayer to annul the cancellation of the certificate of title refused

Facts

Judgment in Fort Portal HCCS No. 018 of 2020 was delivered in favour of the respondent on 5 April 2024, with the applicant as the losing party. The applicant filed a notice of appeal on 9 April 2024 and obtained an interim order from the High Court, but his application to stay execution and to set aside the order cancelling the certificate of title to the suit land was dismissed. The Registrar of Titles cancelled the certificate of title for the land comprised in Bunyangabu Block 76 Plot 3, previously held by the applicant and others as tenants in common, on 9 May 2024 pursuant to the trial court's order, before the present application was filed. The respondent had since sold about 30 acres of the land to a third party in June 2024. The applicant, who resides on and derives his livelihood from part of the suit land, contended the cancellation was tainted by fraud and that he would suffer irreparable loss if the remaining portion were sold. The application to this court was filed on 8 November 2024.

Issues

1. Whether there is sufficient cause justifying a stay of execution of the decree in HCCS No. 018 of 2020 pending the outcome of the appeal.
2. Whether sufficient cause has been shown for annulment, cancellation and/or setting aside of the cancellation of the certificate of title to the suit land pending the appeal.

Orders

• An order staying execution of the orders of the Court at Fort Portal in HCCS No. 018 of 2020 is issued.
• The order for the applicant to vacate the suit land is stayed pending the determination of Civil Appeal No. 721 of 2024.
• The respondent and his servants, agents or persons working under him shall not sell any part of the suit land until the final determination of Civil Appeal No. 721 of 2024.
• The costs of this application shall abide the outcome of Civil Appeal No. 721 of 2024.

Rules and key headnotes

Legislation cited (6)

• Civil Procedure Act s.98
• Court of Appeal Rules r.2(2)
• Court of Appeal Rules r.6(2)(b)
• Court of Appeal Rules r.43(1)
• Court of Appeal Rules r.44(1)
• Judicature (Court of Appeal Rules) Directions S.I. 13-10 r.5(2)(b)

Cases cited (5)

• Lawrence Musiitwa Kyazze v Eunice Busingye (Supreme Court Civil Application No. 18 of 1990)
• Theodore Ssekikubo and Others v Attorney General and Another (Constitutional Application No. 6 of 2013)
• Tropical Commodities Supplies Ltd and Others v International Credit Bank Ltd (2004) 2 EA 331
• City Council of Kampala v Donozio Musisi Sekyaya (Court of Appeal Civil Application No. 3 of 2000)
• DFCU Bank Ltd v Ann Persis Nakate (Court of Appeal Civil Application No. 29 of 2003)

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