Mukasasalongo v Mukiibi Geofrey [2026] UGHCLD 116
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 restated the four conditions for a stay of execution pending appeal under Order 43 rule 4 of the Civil Procedure Rules: a lodged notice of appeal, substantial loss, absence of unreasonable delay, and security for due performance of the decree. Substantial loss means something more than the ordinary loss suffered by every judgment debtor. Taxation of a bill of costs is part of execution proceedings and may be stayed. Although the applicant had not expressed willingness to provide security, having satisfied the other conditions the stay was granted conditionally upon depositing UGX 5,000,000 within 60 days, with taxation proceedings stayed pending the appeal.
Outcome
Stay of execution granted conditionally upon deposit of UGX 5,000,000 within 60 days; taxation proceedings stayed pending the appeal
Facts
Judgment was entered against the applicant in Civil Suit No. 83 of 2015 on 5 July 2024, declaring him a trespasser on the suit land and awarding general damages and costs to the respondent. The applicant filed a notice of appeal on 15 July 2024, lodged the record of appeal in the Court of Appeal on 31 October 2024, and filed this application for a stay of execution in December 2024. The respondent had commenced taxation of his bill of costs (Taxation Application No. 0358 of 2024), which had been taxed by the date of the ruling, though the respondent maintained that no formal application for execution had been filed. The applicant deposed that following the judgment he was forcefully evicted from the land, his house was demolished without due process, and the land was transferred into the name of a third party who was not a party to the suit. The respondent contended that the applicant's difficulties were self-inflicted, that he had continued to trespass and file multiple suits over the same land, and that stay proceedings were being used to frustrate enjoyment of the fruits of judgment; he asked the court to order security for costs. The applicant opposed security, arguing it was discretionary and unnecessary.
Issues
- Whether the applicant established sufficient grounds for a stay of execution pending the determination of his appeal.
- Whether taxation of a bill of costs forms part of execution proceedings capable of being stayed.
- Whether the applicant was required to provide security for the due performance of the decree as a condition of a stay.
Orders
- The application for a stay of execution is granted on condition that the applicant deposits Shs. 5,000,000/- (five million shillings only) within 60 days from this ruling.
- The stay of execution is relevant only to the grant of general damages and the costs; Taxation Application No. 358 of 2024 is stayed pending determination of Court of Appeal Civil Appeal No. 669 of 2024.
- The costs of the application will abide the outcome of the appeal.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (4)
- Civil Procedure Act s.98
- Judicature Act Cap 16 s.33 (now s.37)
- Civil Procedure Rules O.43 r.4
- Civil Procedure Rules O.52 rr.1, 2 and 3
Cases cited (2)
- Tanzania Cotton Marketing Board vs Coget Cotton Co. S.A (1995-1998) EA 312
- John Baptist Kawanga v Namyalo Kevina and Another (Miscellaneous Application No. 12 of 2017)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.