Wakilii

Murad v Bwogi & Another (Miscellaneous Application 799 of 2024)

High Court · [2024] UGHCFD 76 · 2024 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for stay of execution pending determination of review application arising from contempt proceedings
Decision
Application dismissed; applicant ordered to comply with existing court orders on pain of the pending review application not being heard

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 dismissed the application for stay of execution. The applicant failed to prove substantial loss, filed the application with unreasonable delay (over one year after the original judgment), and demonstrated a pattern of disregarding court orders. The court found the application to be an abuse of process. The applicant was ordered to comply with existing contempt orders, failing which the pending review application would not be entertained.

Outcome

Application dismissed; applicant ordered to comply with existing court orders on pain of the pending review application not being heard

Facts

The respondents obtained judgment in Civil Suit No. 0040 of 2010 ordering that Mohamood Noordin Thobani and his agents remove their property from suit premises (Kibuga Block 10 Plots 581 and 582). The applicant, claiming to act as agent for Thobani, refused to vacate despite multiple court orders. The respondents filed a contempt application (MA 0229 of 2023) in which the applicant was found in contempt on 4 October 2023 and ordered to vacate within three days, pay UGX 10,000,000 exemplary damages, UGX 10,000,000 fine, plus costs, or face six months imprisonment. The applicant defied these orders and filed MA 1257 of 2023 for stay of execution, which was dismissed. A warrant of arrest for UGX 21,588,333 was issued on 15 May 2024. On 24 May 2024, the applicant filed MA 0797 of 2024 seeking review of the original 2010 judgment and this present application for stay of execution pending that review. Notably, Thobani himself had written instructing the applicant to remove property and had complied with court orders, disassociating himself from the applicant.

Issues

  1. Whether there exists sufficient cause for a stay of execution pending the determination of Miscellaneous Application No. 0797 of 2024 for review and setting aside of Judgment and Orders in Civil Suit No. 0040 of 2010 and Miscellaneous Application No. 0229 of 2023.

Orders

  • Application dismissed with costs.
  • The Applicant shall comply with the Orders of the Court in Miscellaneous Application No. 0229 of 2023.
  • Failure to comply will result in the Court not entertaining Miscellaneous Application No. 0797 of 2024.

Rules and key headnotes

Stay of Execution — Grounds — Substantial Loss
An applicant seeking a stay of execution must adduce evidence proving that substantial loss will result if the stay is not granted. Bare assertion without supporting evidence is insufficient. Where the alleged loss is self-imposed through deliberate non-compliance with court orders, it does not constitute substantial loss warranting a stay.
Stay of Execution — Unreasonable Delay
An application for stay of execution filed over one year after the judgment sought to be reviewed, and only after a warrant of arrest has been issued for non-compliance with subsequent contempt orders, constitutes unreasonable delay. Such delay, when unexplained, supports an inference that the application is designed to frustrate the execution of court orders.
Abuse of Process — Serial Non-Compliance with Court Orders
Where a party persistently refuses to comply with court orders, files multiple unsuccessful applications to stay execution, and only seeks review after issuance of a warrant of arrest, such conduct constitutes an abuse of the court process. The court may refuse to entertain further applications unless and until the party complies with existing orders.

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Murad v Bwogi & Another (Miscellaneous Application 799 of 2024) [2024] UGHCFD 76 (1 November 2024)
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.