Kiyega George William v Rapid Advisory Services Ltd (Miscellaneous Application No. 2352 of 2025)
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 by a judgment debtor seeking discovery of documents and stay of execution. The court held that Order 22 rule 38 of the Civil Procedure Rules applies only to decree holders, not judgment debtors. The applicant failed to prove the respondent possessed the certificates of title sought, the valuation report was already on court record, and a statement of account was not material where execution arose from a consent order to which the applicant had consented.
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs to the Respondent
Facts
The applicant and respondent had a business relationship involving loan facilities secured by various land titles. Pursuant to a consent order in EMA No. 280 of 2022, two properties were to be sold in execution of a decree in Civil Suit No. 806 of 2018. Only one property (Block 44 Plot 492 at Namusansula) was sold for UGX 100,000,000. The second property could not be sold due to squatters. The respondent then sought a warrant of arrest for the outstanding balance via EMA No. 188 of 2025. The applicant filed this application seeking production of certificates of title allegedly held by the respondent, a valuation report for the sold property, and a statement of account, arguing these documents were necessary to enable him to satisfy the judgment debt. He also sought a stay of execution pending production of the documents.
Issues
- Whether the Court should grant an order for discovery of the documents?
- What remedies are available to the parties?
Orders
- Application dismissed.
- Costs awarded to the Respondent.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (7)
- Civil Procedure Act Cap. 282 s.22(a)
- Civil Procedure Act Cap. 282 s.98
- Civil Procedure Rules SI 71-1 Order 10 rule 12
- Civil Procedure Rules SI 71-1 Order 15 rule 5(1)
- Civil Procedure Rules SI 71-1 Order 22 rule 23(1)
- Civil Procedure Rules SI 71-1 Order 22 rule 38
- Civil Procedure Rules SI 71-1 Order 22 rule 89(1)
Cases cited (6)
- Oriental Insurance Brokers Limited v Transocean (U) Limited (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 55 of 1995)
- Uganda Telecom Ltd v ZTE Corporation (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 3 of 2017)
- Patricia Mutesi v Attorney General (High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 912 of 2016)
- John Kato v Muhlbauer AG & Another (High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 175 of 2011)
- Simbamanyo Estates Ltd & Another v Equity Uganda Ltd & Others (High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 583 of 2022)
- Kaweesi Sulaiman and 26 Others v Bank of Uganda and Another (High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 258 of 2022)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.