Mwesigwa v Petro Uganda Limited (Civil Application 105 of 2019)

Observed later treatment

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.

Holding

A single justice of the Court of Appeal may, under section 12 of the Judicature Act, exercise the powers of the Court only in an interlocutory cause or matter actually pending before the Court of Appeal. As Civil Appeal No. 97 of 2009 had already been concluded and only a notice of appeal to the Supreme Court was on record, there was no pending matter before the Court of Appeal. Consequently the single justice had no jurisdiction to grant a stay of execution pending appeal to the Supreme Court, and the application was incompetent. The application was struck out with costs.

Outcome

Application for stay of execution struck out as incompetent for want of jurisdiction

Facts

The respondent obtained judgment against the applicant in High Court Civil Suit No. 633 of 2004 (Commercial Division) for special damages of about UGX 536,000,239 with interest at 21% from 25 August 2005, plus nominal damages. The applicant's Civil Appeal No. 97 of 2009 to the Court of Appeal was dismissed with costs on 4 April 2019. Dissatisfied, the applicant filed a notice of appeal to the Supreme Court and requested a certified record of proceedings. He then sought a stay of execution before a single justice of the Court of Appeal, contending that execution would render his intended appeal nugatory and cause substantial loss, and that he was willing to provide security. The respondent argued the decretal debt had escalated to over UGX 2 billion and that the application lacked evidence. The single justice raised, of his own motion, the question whether he had jurisdiction given that Civil Appeal No. 97 of 2009 was concluded and no interlocutory matter was pending before the Court of Appeal.

Issues

1. Whether a single justice of the Court of Appeal has jurisdiction under section 12 of the Judicature Act to hear an application for stay of execution where there is no interlocutory matter pending before the Court of Appeal.
2. Whether the applicant's application for stay of execution, arising from a concluded civil appeal and pending an intended appeal to the Supreme Court, was competent before a single justice of the Court of Appeal.

Orders

• The applicant's application is struck out with costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Legislation cited (8)

• Judicature Act cap 13 s.12
• Constitution of the Republic of Uganda art.135(1)
• Constitution of the Republic of Uganda art.132(2)
• Judicature (Court of Appeal Rules) Directions r.53
• Judicature (Court of Appeal Rules) Directions r.6(2)(b)
• Judicature (Court of Appeal Rules) Directions r.76(1)
• Judicature (Court of Appeal Rules) Directions r.2(2)
• Judicature (Court of Appeal Rules) Directions r.3

Cases cited (10)

• Stanbic Bank Uganda Ltd v Atabya Agencies Ltd (Civil Application No. 31 of 2004)
• Wilson Mukiibi v James Semusambwa (Civil Application No. 9 of 2003)
• Florah Ramalungu v DFCU Leasing Co. Ltd (Civil Application No. 11 of 2009)
• Outreach to Africa Ltd v Stephen Manigamukama SC Civil Application Number 04 of 2015
• Gashumba Maniraguha v Sam Nkundiye (Civil Application No. 24 of 2015)
• Ssekikubo and Others v Attorney General and Another (Constitutional Application No. 6 of 2013)
• Hajj Ari Cheboi v Kiboko Mesuramu (Miscellaneous Application No. 105 of 2014)
• Kampala Bottlers v Uganda Bottlers Ltd
• Wilson v Church (1879) 12 Ch D 454
• Somali Democratic Republic v Anoop Sunderlal Treon (Civil Appeal No. 11 of 1988)

Cases citing this judgment (2)

How later Ugandan judgments in the Wakilii corpus have cited this case. Treatment labels come from Sequitur — Uganda’s citator — each backed by a verbatim span from the citing judgment, and are not an assertion that this case is, or is not, good law.

• Ojera & Another v Omona (Miscellaneous Application No 105 of 2019)
• Mwesigwa v Petro(Uganda) Ltd (Civil Appeal No. 0162 of 2012)

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