Wakilii

Masuba Muzamiru v Magombe Hussein (Civil Appeal 245 of 2009)

High Court · [2010] UGHC 260 · 2010 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for stay of execution of a judgment from Civil Appeal No. 125 of 2009, originating from Mbale Civil Suit No. 82 of 2004
Decision
Stay of execution granted on condition that the applicant execute a bond of UGX 20,000,000 guaranteed by his father

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 granted a stay of execution where the respondent did not object in principle but contested the form of security. Held that the court has wide discretion to determine the nature of security under Order 43 rule 4(3)(c) CPR and that security need not be monetary. The applicant's proposal to pledge his father's customary residential house was insufficient where ownership and value were not ascertained. Court ordered the applicant to execute a bond of UGX 20,000,000 guaranteed by his father.

Outcome

Stay of execution granted on condition that the applicant execute a bond of UGX 20,000,000 guaranteed by his father

Facts

The applicant Masuba Muzamiru applied for a stay of execution of a judgment concerning suit land on which his residence was situated. He argued that demolition would cause substantial loss to him and his family, that the application was made without unreasonable delay, and that he was prepared to furnish security. The respondent Magombe Hussein did not oppose the grant of stay in principle but required reasonable security. The applicant proposed his father Mudoma Abdu as guarantor and offered to pledge his father's permanent residential house valued at UGX 8 million in Bufumbo. The respondent objected that the proposed security was insufficient as the subject matter was developed land valued beyond UGX 30 million.

Issues

  1. Whether the court should grant a stay of execution pending appeal.
  2. What constitutes sufficient security for a stay of execution.

Orders

  • Stay of execution granted.
  • Applicant to execute a bond of UGX 20,000,000 for due performance of the decree or order as may ultimately be binding upon him.
  • The applicant's father, Mudoma Abdu, to guarantee the bond.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Stay of Execution — Discretion as to Form of Security
Under Order 43 rule 4(3)(c) of the Civil Procedure Rules, the court has wide discretion to determine the nature of security to be accepted as sufficient in a stay of execution application, as the provision does not specify the type or mode of security, and security does not necessarily have to be monetary.
Civil Procedure — Stay of Execution — Sufficiency of Security — Unascertained Property
A proposed pledge of a customary residential house as security for a stay of execution is insufficient where the ownership and value of the property have not been ascertained, even where the property owner offers to act as guarantor.

Legislation cited (3)

  • Civil Procedure Rules O.43 r.4(2)
  • Civil Procedure Rules O.43 r.4(3)(c)
  • Civil Procedure Rules O.43 r.5

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Masuba Muzamiru v Magombe Hussein (Civil Appeal 245 of 2009) [2010] UGHC 260 (3 March 2010)
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.