Wakilii

Nakamatte Namusisi Justine v Stephen Bamwanga and Others (Miscellaneous Application No. 2535 of 2025)

High Court · [2026] UGHCLD 54 · 2026 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for stay of execution of orders arising from Miscellaneous Application No. 1941 of 2025, pending determination of a review application
Decision
Application dismissed; respondents at liberty to proceed with execution

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 determination of a review application. The court held that the applicant failed to demonstrate a reasonable likelihood of success in the review application, as no manifest error on the face of the record was shown. The court found that the applicant was attempting to use review as a substitute for an appeal, which is impermissible. The balance of convenience favoured allowing the successful party to enjoy the fruits of their judgment.

Outcome

Application dismissed; respondents at liberty to proceed with execution

Facts

The applicant, as administrator of an estate, filed an application seeking stay of execution of orders issued in Miscellaneous Application No. 1941 of 2025, pending determination of a review application (Miscellaneous Application No. 2504 of 2025). The applicant claimed that the respondents threatened to execute the orders and that the review application had high chances of success. The respondents opposed the application, arguing that there was no competent review application, that the applicant was using review as a substitute for appeal, and that the application was brought in bad faith to delay justice. The ruling in Miscellaneous Application No. 1941 of 2025 was delivered on 3 December 2025, and the review application was filed on 10 December 2025.

Issues

  1. Whether this is a proper case for stay of execution of the orders arising from the ruling in Miscellaneous Application No. 1941 of 2025.
  2. What remedies are available to the parties.

Orders

  • The application for stay of execution of the orders arising from Miscellaneous Application No. 1941 of 2025 is dismissed.
  • The Respondents are at liberty to proceed with execution in accordance with the law.
  • Costs of this application are awarded to the Respondents.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Stay of Execution — Requirements for Grant
An applicant seeking stay of execution must demonstrate the existence of a pending appeal or substantive application with a likelihood of success, that the appeal or application would be rendered nugatory if stay is not granted, and where the first two are not established, the court should consider the balance of convenience and that the application was filed without unreasonable delay.
Civil Procedure — Review — Grounds for Review — Error Apparent on Face of Record
Review may only be granted where an applicant demonstrates discovery of new and important matter or evidence, mistake or error apparent on the face of the record, or any other sufficient reason. Review is not available merely because a party is dissatisfied with a decision.
Civil Procedure — Review — Review as Substitute for Appeal
Review cannot be used as an appeal in disguise. Review is not intended to enable a party to re-argue matters already determined.

Legislation cited (4)

Cases cited (2)

  • Mugambe Steven v Ernest Ssensalire Semakade and Another (HCMA No. 2907 of 2023)
  • Olula and 31 Others v Attorney General (HCMA No. 0068 of 2015)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Nakamatte_Namusisi_Justine_v_Stephen_Bamwanga_and_Others_(Miscellaneous_Application_No._2535_of_2025)_[2026]_UGHCLD_54_(16_March_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.