Wakilii

Nandawula Hadija an 2 Others v Nalwevlso Jevieo [2026] UGHCLD 84

High Court · 2026 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for stay of execution of a High Court decree pending determination of an appeal in the Court of Appeal
Decision
Application for stay of execution dismissed as premature; execution of the decree in HCCS No. 798 of 2007 not stayed

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

An application for stay of execution pending appeal presupposes a valid, competent appeal. Where the applicants' notice of appeal was lodged out of time and a separate application seeking extension of time, leave to appeal and validation of the notice, memorandum and record of appeal was still pending before the Court of Appeal, there was as yet no valid or competent appeal capable of supporting a stay. The court held the application premature and declined to consider the remaining Ssekikubo conditions (substantial loss, absence of unreasonable delay and security for due performance) or the Kyambogo University factors. The application was dismissed with costs to the respondent.

Outcome

Application for stay of execution dismissed as premature; execution of the decree in HCCS No. 798 of 2007 not stayed

Facts

The applicants were the judgment debtors in High Court Civil Suit No. 798 of 2007, which they lost on 8 November 2024. Dissatisfied, they filed a notice of appeal and a letter requesting proceedings on 6 December 2024, twenty-eight days after judgment, instead of within the fourteen days prescribed by the rules. They lodged Civil Appeal No. 0468 of 2025 in the Court of Appeal and also prepared Civil Application No. 0536 of 2026 seeking extension of time to appeal, leave to appeal, and validation of the notice of appeal served out of time together with the memorandum and record of appeal. Both matters remained pending. The respondent extracted a notice to show cause why execution should not issue (HCT-00-LD-EMA-0208-2025) and filed a bill of costs for taxation (HCT-00-LD-TA-0298-2025). The applicants sought a stay of execution, alleging irreparable damage and a miscarriage of justice through poor evaluation of evidence at trial. The respondent replied that the application was a delaying tactic, filed unreasonably late after seventeen years of litigation, that the appeal was out of time with minimal prospects, and that no security for due performance had been given.

Issues

  1. Whether the applicants demonstrated sufficient grounds warranting the exercise of the court's discretion to grant a stay of execution pending appeal.
  2. Whether an application for stay of execution can be entertained where the notice of appeal was filed out of time and an application to validate it and extend time remains pending before the Court of Appeal.

Orders

  • Application dismissed.
  • Costs of the application awarded to the respondent.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Stay of Execution Pending Appeal — Requirement of a Competent Notice of Appeal
An application for stay of execution pending appeal cannot be sustained where the notice of appeal was filed out of time and an application for extension of time and validation of that notice is still pending, because until validation there is no competent appeal upon which a stay can operate.
Civil Procedure — Stay of Execution Pending Appeal — Conditions for Grant
An applicant for stay of execution pending appeal must show a lodged notice of appeal, that substantial loss may result unless the stay is granted, that the application was made without unreasonable delay, and that security for due performance of the decree has been given; additional considerations include imminent threat of execution, that the appeal is not frivolous and has a high likelihood of success, and comparative hardship.
Civil Procedure — Prematurity — Court Declining to Consider Remaining Conditions
Where an application for stay of execution is found to be premature for want of a competent appeal, the court need not proceed to consider the remaining conditions governing the grant of a stay.

Legislation cited (3)

Cases cited (3)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Nandawula Hadija an 2 Others v Nalwevlso Jevieo [2026] UGHCLD 84 (14 April 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.