Wakilii

Nsubuga Charles alias Ntunda v Board Of Governors Buvuma College (Miscellaneous Application 26 of 2025)

High Court · [2026] UGHC 561 · 2026 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for stay of execution of Chief Magistrate's Court judgment pending appeal to High Court
Decision
Stay of execution granted pending determination of High Court Civil Appeal No. 026 of 2025, conditional upon deposit of full taxed costs within 30 days

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

Held that the applicant satisfied the conditions for a stay of execution pending appeal. The court found that there was a pending appeal with arguable grounds, the applicant would suffer substantial loss if execution proceeded as the subject matter was land which is unique and cannot be adequately compensated by damages, and there was imminent threat of execution. Application granted with condition that applicant deposit full taxed costs within 30 days.

Outcome

Stay of execution granted pending determination of High Court Civil Appeal No. 026 of 2025, conditional upon deposit of full taxed costs within 30 days

Facts

The respondent sued the applicant in the Chief Magistrate's Court of Lugazi at Buvuma over approximately 3 acres of land forming part of 50 acres allocated to the school by Government in 1987. The applicant claimed his family had occupied the land since 1979 without compensation. The trial court found for the respondent on 7 November 2024, declaring the respondent lawful owner, finding the applicant a trespasser, and awarding UGX 2,000,000 general damages. The applicant filed a Notice of Appeal on 30 January 2025 and subsequently lodged High Court Civil Appeal No. 0026 of 2025. The applicant then sought a stay of execution, alleging the respondent had commenced cultivating the suit land and filed a bill of costs, threatening to render the appeal nugatory.

Issues

  1. Whether the applicant has made out a sufficient case to warrant a stay of execution pending appeal.

Orders

  • Application allowed in favour of the applicant.
  • The applicant shall deposit the full taxed costs in the Court account within 30 days from delivery of this Ruling and furnish proof to the Registrar as a pre-condition to allowing this Application.
  • The costs of this Application shall abide in the outcome of the Appeal.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Stay of Execution — Conditions for Grant
For a court to grant an application for stay of execution pending appeal, the applicant must establish: (1) that the appeal has a likelihood of success or a prima facie case; (2) that the applicant will suffer irreparable damage or the appeal will be rendered nugatory if stay is not granted; (3) where the first two are not established, the court must consider where the balance of convenience lies; and (4) that the application was instituted without delay.
Civil Procedure — Stay of Execution — Substantial Loss
The phrase 'substantial loss' does not represent any particular amount or size and cannot be qualified by any particular mathematical formula. It refers to any loss great or small of real worth or value as distinguished from a loss that is merely nominal. The applicant must go beyond vague and general assertions and lay the basis upon which the court can make a finding that substantial loss will result.
Land & Property — Stay of Execution — Uniqueness of Land
Where the subject matter of an appeal is land, a successful appellant may not be adequately compensated by damages if the land has been alienated or its character substantially changed. Land is unique and cannot be compensated adequately by damages where the appeal challenges the root of title.
Civil Procedure — Stay of Execution — Security for Costs
The provision of security for due performance of the decree is mandatory before any order for stay of execution can be granted. However, the court has discretion to dispense with depositing of security for costs if the justice of the case warrants. The requirement is more of justice and insistence on policy or practice that mandates security for the entire decretal amount is likely to stifle appeals.
Civil Procedure — Stay of Execution — Notice of Appeal as Sufficient Basis
A Notice of Appeal is sufficient expression of an intention to file an appeal and such action is sufficient to found the basis for grant of orders of stay in appropriate cases. Where a Notice of Appeal or an application or an appeal is pending before a superior court, it is right and proper that an interim order for stay of execution be granted in the interests of justice and to prevent the proceedings and any order therefrom of the appellate court being rendered nugatory.

Legislation cited (5)

Cases cited (22)

  • Hon. Theodore Ssekikubo and Ors v The Attorney General and Ors (Constitutional Application No. 3 of 2014)
  • Lawrence Musiitwa Kyazze v Eunice Busingye (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 18 of 1990)
  • Hansa Industries Ltd v Tadjir Hussein & 2 Ors (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 19 of 2018)
  • Nalwanga v Eden Ltd & Ors (Miscellaneous Application No. 7 of 2017)
  • Mugene v Akankwasa [2008] HCB 160
  • Membe vs. Mayoga [2009] HCB 82
  • Kyambogo University v Prof. Isaiah Omolo Ndiege (Court of Appeal Civil Appeal No. 341 of 2013)
  • Stanbic Bank Uganda v Atyaba Agencies (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 31 of 2004)
  • Attorney General of Uganda v East African Law Society & Another (EACJ Application No. 1 of 2013)
  • Tropical Commodities Supplies Ltd and 2 others vs International Credit Bank Limited (in Liquidation) [2004] 2 EA 331
  • Hwang Sung Industries Ltd v Tadjaudin Hussein & Others (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 79 of 2008)
  • Steel Rolling Mills Ltd & Anor vs Gestation Economique des Mission Catholic & Anor
  • Pan African Insurance Company (U) Ltd v International Air Transport (High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 86 of 2006)
  • Bashidar v Pribku Dyal Air 41 1954
  • George William Kayonga vs. Lottie Kyozira (2006) HCB 78
  • Sewankambo Dickson v Ziwa Abby (High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 178 of 2005)
  • Ujagar Singh vs Runda Coffee Estates Ltd.
  • New Vision Publishing Corporation & 2 Others v Peter Kagawa (High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 127 of 2006)
  • Ntege Mayambala vs. Christopher Mwanje (1993) KALR 97
  • International Credit Bank (In Liquidation) v Tropical Commodities Ltd & 2 Others (Court of Appeal Civil Appeal No. 24 of 2004)
  • Amuanaun Sam v Opolot David (Miscellaneous Application No. 3 of 2014)
  • Musiitwa v Eunice Busingye (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 18 of 1990)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Nsubuga Charles alias Ntunda v Board Of Governors Buvuma College (Miscellaneous Application 26 of 2025) [2026] UGHC 561 (25 May 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.