Wakilii

Mugooda Patrick v Benon Kyeyune Mukasa and Another (Miscellaneous Application No. 437 of 2026)

High Court · [2026] UGCOMMC 182 · 2026 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for stay of execution pending appeal from judgment in Civil Suit No. 1462 of 2023
Decision
Application for stay of execution dismissed with costs to the respondents

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 for stay of execution pending appeal. The applicant failed to disclose any grounds of appeal or demonstrate a likelihood of success. The application was overtaken by events as the applicant had already vacated the suit premises. No imminent threat of execution was established and no irreparable damage was shown that could not be compensated by damages.

Outcome

Application for stay of execution dismissed with costs to the respondents

Facts

The applicant was appointed caretaker of the first respondent's land. When the respondents sought vacant possession, the applicant refused, claiming unpaid compensation. On 10 February 2026, the High Court delivered judgment in Civil Suit No. 1462 of 2023 in favour of the respondents, declaring the applicant a trespasser, ordering him to vacate, and awarding general damages of UGX 70,000,000. The applicant filed a Notice of Appeal on 17 February 2026 and this application for stay of execution. By the time of the additional affidavit, the applicant had already vacated the premises. The applicant claimed he held the property as a lien and that the respondents intended to dispose of it, but provided no evidence of imminent execution.

Issues

  1. Whether the application discloses sufficient grounds for the grant of an order of stay of execution.
  2. What remedies are available to the parties.

Orders

  • Application dismissed.
  • Costs awarded to the Respondents.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Stay of Execution — Conditions for Grant
An applicant seeking stay of execution pending appeal must satisfy established conditions including: filing a notice of appeal, demonstrating likelihood of success, showing imminent threat of execution that would render the appeal nugatory, proving irreparable damage, and acting without unreasonable delay.
Civil Procedure — Stay of Execution — Likelihood of Success
Where an applicant fails to disclose any grounds of appeal or draft grounds in the pleadings, there is no evidence for the court to determine whether the intended appeal has a likelihood of success, and this condition for stay of execution is not satisfied.
Civil Procedure — Stay of Execution — Imminent Threat of Execution
Where an applicant has already vacated the suit premises and presents no evidence of any application for execution, there is no imminent threat of execution and the application for stay is overtaken by events.
Civil Procedure — Stay of Execution — Irreparable Damage — Money Decrees
Satisfaction of a money decree does not ordinarily pose the danger of rendering a pending appeal nugatory where the respondent is not shown to be impecunious, as the remedy of restitution is available to the applicant in the event the appeal is allowed.

Legislation cited (9)

Cases cited (19)

  • Oriental Insurance Brokers Limited v Transocean (U) Limited (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 55 of 1995)
  • Sam Kiwanuka Walusimbi v Kate Nakatumba Kiwala Tamale (Miscellaneous Application No. 338 of 2024)
  • Lawrence Musiitwa Kyazze v Eunice Busingye (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 18 of 1990)
  • Theodore Sekikubo and Others v Attorney General and Others (Supreme Court Constitutional Application No. 6 of 2013)
  • Formula Feeds Limited and 3 Others v KCB Bank Ltd (High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 1647 of 2022)
  • Emaku Joseph and Another v Emelu Ojamuge Charles (Court of Appeal Civil Application No. 76 of 2024)
  • Gashumba Maniraguha v Sam Nkudiye (Supreme Court Civil Application No. 24 of 2015)
  • Kyambogo University v Prof. Isaiah Omolo Ndiege (Court of Appeal Civil Application No. 341 of 2013)
  • M&D Timber Merchants & Transporters Ltd v Hwan Sung Ltd and Kampala District Land Board (Miscellaneous Application No. 1767 of 2022)
  • RWW Vs EKW (2019) e KLR
  • Busingye Provia and 2 Others v Shedrack Yaboneka (Court of Appeal Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 598 of 2025)
  • Janaco (T) Limited and 2 Others v DFCU Bank Ltd (Court of Appeal Civil Application No. 145 of 2023)
  • Orient Bank Ltd v Fredrick J.K. Zaabwe (Civil Application No. 19 of 2007)
  • Damalie Namakula Bisobye v Byakusaaga Bisobye Ssebulime and Another (Court of Appeal Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 548 of 2025)
  • Olivia da Ritta Siqueira E Facho Vs Siqueira [1933] 15 KLR 34
  • Jadva Karsan Vs Harnam Singh Bhogal [1953] 20 EACA 74
  • Uganda Revenue Authority v East African Property Holding Limited (Court of Appeal Civil Appeal No. 144 of 2014)
  • Eriabu Kabigiza Vs Lawrence Sserwanja [1975] HCB 199
  • Joel Kato v Nuulu Nalwoga (Supreme Court Miscellaneous Application No. 11 of 2011)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Mugooda Patrick v Benon Kyeyune Mukasa and Another (Miscellaneous Application No. 437 of 2026) [2026] UGCommC 182 (11 May 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.