Mpower Oil (U) Limited v Norvik Hospital Limited [2026] UGCOMMC 375
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 Commercial Division dismissed an application for stay of execution pending appeal. Although the applicant had filed a notice of appeal, made the application without unreasonable delay, and expressed willingness to give security, the court held it failed to establish an imminent threat of execution (no garnishee order nisi had been made) and adduced no evidence of substantial loss. Decisively, the applicant remained in contempt of court under a related application and had not purged that contempt; a party in contempt cannot be heard on a related motion until it does so. As the applicant met few of the settled conditions, the application was dismissed with costs to the respondent.
Outcome
Application for stay of execution dismissed with costs to the respondent
Facts
The applicant, judgment debtor in Civil Suit No. 1219 of 2023, sought a stay of execution pending its appeal to the Court of Appeal. Judgment in the suit was delivered electronically on 8 December 2025. The applicant filed a notice of appeal on 18 March 2026 and filed this stay application on 19 May 2026. The respondent had filed Miscellaneous Application No. 0619 of 2026 seeking a garnishee order to attach money in the applicant's bank accounts, but no garnishee order nisi had yet been issued. The court had earlier ordered the applicant to provide security, which had not been paid. The applicant remained in contempt of court in relation to Miscellaneous Application No. 0934 of 2025 and had not purged that contempt. The applicant deposed a willingness to provide security for due performance of the decree.
Issues
- Whether the applicant disclosed sufficient grounds for the grant of a stay of execution pending appeal.
- What remedies are available to the parties.
Orders
- Application dismissed.
- Costs of the application awarded to the respondent.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (6)
Cases cited (15)
- Musiitwa Kyazze v Busingye (Civil Application No. 18 of 1990)
- Kyambogo University v Prof. Isaiah Omolo Ndiege (Civil Appeal No. 341 of 2013)
- [2026] UGHC 467
- [2025] UGCommC 504
- Senkungu & 4 Ors v Mukasa (Civil Appeal No. 17 of 2014)
- Jovelyn Barugahare v Attorney General (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 28 of 1993)
- Tropical Commodities Supplies Ltd & 2 Others Vs International Credit Bank Ltd (In Liquidation) [2004]2 EA 331
- Uganda Revenue Authority v National Social Security Fund (Civil Application No. 43 of 2023)
- Brian Kigozi v Kirunda Moses Menya (Civil Application No. 136 of 2025)
- [2008] UGCA 6
- Kawanga v Namyalo & Anor (Miscellaneous Application No. 12 of 2017)
- DFCU Bank Ltd v Dr. Ann Parsis Nakate Lusejjere (Civil Application No. 29 of 2003)
- Hadkinson v Hadkinson [1952] 2 All ER 579
- Stanbic Bank Uganda Limited v Vegol Limited (Miscellaneous Application No. 2864 of 2023)
- Wild life Lodges Ltd Vs County Council of Narok & Anor [2005] 2 EA 344
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.