Nile Breweries Limited v Uganda Revenue Authority (Miscellaneous Application No. 2781 of 2025)

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.

Holding

Held that an interim stay of execution should be granted where a notice of appeal has been lodged, a substantive application for stay is pending, and there is a serious threat of execution before the hearing of the substantive application. A demand notice from Uganda Revenue Authority threatening agency notices against the applicant's bankers constitutes an imminent threat of execution sufficient to warrant interim relief to preserve the status quo.

Outcome

Interim stay of execution granted pending hearing of substantive application for stay

Facts

Nile Breweries Limited manufactures alcoholic beverages including beer for export through export agents Kabaco Uganda Ltd and Ituri Investments Limited to South Sudan and Democratic Republic of Congo. Uganda Revenue Authority raised assessments totalling UGX 18,509,052,729 (VAT of UGX 8,043,093,350 and LED of UGX 10,465,959,379) for January to November 2022, alleging misclassification of local sales to these agents as exports. The applicant objected on grounds that the entities were export agents, not local purchasers. URA disallowed the objections. The Tax Appeals Tribunal dismissed the applicant's appeal. The applicant filed a notice of appeal to the High Court and a substantive application for stay of execution. URA issued a demand notice threatening agency notices against the applicant's bankers. The applicant had already paid 30% of the assessed amount (UGX 5,552,715,819). The applicant sought interim stay pending hearing of the substantive stay application.

Issues

1. Whether the Applicant has disclosed sufficient grounds for reliefs sought?
2. What remedies are available?

Orders

• Application allowed.
• Interim stay of execution granted restraining the Respondent from executing the orders in TAT Application No. 135 of 2024 until final determination of the substantive application for stay of execution.
• Costs in the cause.

Rules and key headnotes

Legislation cited (6)

• Tax Appeals Tribunals Act Cap 341 s.28
• Civil Procedure Act Cap 282 s.98
• Civil Procedure Rules SI 71-1 Order 52 Rules 1, 2 & 3
• Civil Procedure Rules SI 71-1 Order 15 Rule 3
• Evidence Act Cap 8 s.101
• Evidence Act Cap 8 s.103

Cases cited (6)

• Hwan Sung Industries Ltd v Tajdin Hussein & Others (Civil Application No. 19 of 2008)
• Kampala Financial Services Ltd & Another v Hussein Muhammad (Civil Application No. 146 of 2021)
• White Nile Consultants & Another v DFCU Bank (Civil Application No. 19 of 2023)
• Turyahikayo v Attorney General (Miscellaneous Application No. 139 of 2015)
• Senkungu & 4 Others v Mukasa (Civil Appeal No. 17 of 2014)
• Jovelyn Barugahare v Attorney General (SCCA No. 28 of 1993)

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